The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2016-09-20 Packet 1 dalarc under penrlty of perjury that I am employed bq the City of Chula Visn in the office of the Ciry Clerk and thu 1 posted the docump�t�ccording[o Brown Act requiremmu. � , _ ��tr� � : 5 (�i S�� . , .� �� +. CIIY OF CHUTA V15TA � � Mary Casillas Salas, Mayor Patricia Aguflar, Councilmember Gary Halbert, City Manager Pamela Bensoussan, Councilmember Glen R. Googins, City Attomey John McCann, Councilmember ponna R. Norris, City Clerk Steve Miesen, Councilmember Tuesday, September 20, 2016 5:00 PM Council Chambers 276 4th Avenue, Building A Chula Vista, CA 91910 REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL: Councilmembers Aguilar. Bensoussan. McCann Miesen and Mayor Casillas Salas PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG AND MOMENT OF SILENCE SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY A. 16-0448 OATHS OF OFFICE Eric Banatao International Friendship Commission Juan Cervantes Safety Commission Pat Mallen Commission on Aging Jose Torres Veterans Advisory Commission B. 16_0432 PRESENTATION BY THE CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION OF THE COMMUNITY MURAL CREATED AT HARBORFEST 2016 FOR INSTALLATION AT CITY HALL Crty ol Chula Vista Page 1 Printe0 on 9HY1076 September 20, 2016City Council Agenda INTRODUCTION OF CHULA VISTA'S INAUGURAL YOUTH AMBASSADOR TO OUR SISTER CITY, CEBU, PHILIPPINES, LEIRA MAE DIGMA, BY INTERNATIONAL FRIENDSHIP COMMISSION VICE CHAIR FRANCINE MAIGUE AND PRESENTATION OF THEIR ATTENDANCE AT THE FILIPINA LEADERSHIP GLOBAL SUMMIT HELD IN CEBU, PHILIPPINES 16-0453C.16-0453 CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 1 - 10) The Council will enact the Consent Calendar staff recommendations by one motion, without discussion, unless a Councilmember, a member of the public, or staff requests that an item be removed for discussion. If you wish to speak on one of these items, please fill out a “Request to Speak” form (available in the lobby) and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be discussed immediately following the Consent Calendar. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of August 16, 2016.16-04461.16-0446 Council approve the minutes. Staff Recommendation: ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2.05.010 RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF UNCLASSIFIED POSITIONS TO ADD FA PROGRAM ASSISTANT SUPERVISOR (SECOND READING AND ADOPTION) (4/5 VOTE REQUIRED) 16-04492.16-0449 Police Department Department: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. Environmental Notice: Council adopt the ordinance. Staff Recommendation: ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACTING AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 16-I (MILLENIA), AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX IN IMPROVEMENT AREA NO. 1 AND IMPROVEMENT AREA NO. 2 OF SUCH COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT (SECOND READING) 16-04503.16-0450 Development Services Department Department: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. Environmental Notice: Council adopt the ordinance. Staff Recommendation: Page 2 City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 2 September 20, 2016City Council Agenda ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO OTAY RANCH FREEWAY COMMERCIAL SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS (SECOND READING AND ADOPTION) 16-04514.16-0451 Development Services Department Department: The Project was adequately covered in previously adopted/certified Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR 02-04) for the Otay Ranch Freeway Commercial Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan - Planning Area 12. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines Section 15162, a Second Addendum to FEIR 02-04 has been prepared for the project. Environmental Notice: Council adopt the ordinance. Staff Recommendation: ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 1.41.110 TO REMOVE THE EXISTING CIVIL PENALTIES CAP AND DELETING CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 5.66.030 TO PERMIT CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT FOR VIOLATION OF CHAPTER 5.66 (SECOND READING AND ADOPTION) 16-04525.16-0452 City Attorney Department: This activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. Environmental Notice: Council adopt the ordinance. Staff Recommendation: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A TWO PARTY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND MOORE IACOFANO AND GOLTSMAN (MIG), INC., FOR DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE F STREET PROMENADE STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN AND 30% DESIGN DEVELOPMENT CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS 16-03816.16-0381 Development Services Department Department: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. Environmental Notice: Council adopt the resolution. Staff Recommendation: Page 3 City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 3 September 20, 2016City Council Agenda RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF C HULA VISTA APPROVING A LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING (INVOLVING UNIFORMS AND REPORTABLE COMPENSATION, AS DEFINED BY CALPERS) WITH SEIU LOCAL 221/CHULA VISTA EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, AS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OFFICE OF AUDIT SERVICES AND CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, TITLE 2, SECTION 571(b) (1) (A) (B) 16-03797.16-0379 Human Resources Department Department: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. Environmental Notice: Council adopt the resolution. Staff Recommendation: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA COMMITTING TO PROVIDING MATCHING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $220,000 FROM THE BIKE LANES ON BROADWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY PROJECT (STM384) TO THE ATP GRANT “CLASS 2 BIKE LANES ON BROADWAY PROJECT NO. 11-CHULA VISTA-1”; ACCEPTING THE TERMS OF THE GRANT AGREEMENT IF AWARDED; AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS OR HIS DESIGNEE TO ACCEPT THE ATP CYCLE 3 GRANT FUNDING AND EXECUTE ALL GRANT DOCUMENTS AND REQUESTS FOR PAYMENTS NECESSARY TO SECURE GRANT FUNDS 16-04168.16-0416 Public Works Department Department: This activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines, therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. Environmental Notice: Council adopt the resolution. Staff Recommendation: Page 4 City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 4 September 20, 2016City Council Agenda REPORT GIVING NOTICE OF INTENT TO AMEND THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK AND CITY ATTORNEY TO RETURN TO COUNCIL TO PRESENT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS WITHIN 90 DAYS 16-04389.16-0438 City Attorney & City Clerk Department: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. Environmental Notice: Council accept the report and direct the City Clerk and City Attorney to present proposed amendments to the conflict of interest code within 90 days. Staff Recommendation: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING $81,378 FROM THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO AND APPROPRIATING SAID FUNDS TO THE POLICE GRANT FUND FOR REALIGNMENT RESPONSE EFFORTS (4/5 VOTE REQUIRED) 16-044010.16-0440 Police Department Department: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. Environmental Notice: Council adopt the resolution. Staff Recommendation: ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR PUBLIC COMMENTS Persons speaking during Public Comments may address the Council on any subject matter within the Council’s jurisdiction that is not listed as an item on the agenda. State law generally prohibits the Council from discussing or taking action on any issue not included on the agenda, but, if appropriate, the Council may schedule the topic for future discussion or refer the matter to staff. Comments are limited to three minutes. CITY MANAGER’S REPORTS MAYOR’S REPORTS COUNCILMEMBERS’ COMMENTS Page 5 City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 5 September 20, 2016City Council Agenda CLOSED SESSION Announcements of actions taken in Closed Session shall be made available by noon on Wednesday following the Council Meeting at the City Attorney’s office in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act (Government Code 54957.7). CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9 (d)(1) Name of case:Katherine Wenrich v. City of Chula Vista, et al., San Diego Superior Court, Case No. 37-2014-37007 -CU-PA-CTL. 16-044511.16-0445 ADJOURNMENT to the Regular City Council Meeting on October 4, 2016, at 5:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers. Materials provided to the City Council related to any open-session item on this agenda are available for public review at the City Clerk’s Office, located in City Hall at 276 Fourth Avenue, Building A, during normal business hours. In compliance with the AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT The City of Chula Vista requests individuals who require special accommodations to access, attend, and/or participate in a City meeting, activity, or service, contact the City Clerk’s Office at (619) 691-5041(California Relay Service is available for the hearing impaired by dialing 711) at least forty-eight hours in advance of the meeting. Most Chula Vista City Council meetings, including public comments, are video recorded and aired live on AT&T U-verse channel 99 (throughout the County), on Cox Cable channel 24 (only in Chula Vista), and online at www.chulavistaca.gov. Recorded meetings are also aired on Wednesdays at 7 p.m. (both channels) and are archived on the City's website. Sign up at www.chulavistaca.gov to receive email notifications when City Council agendas are published online. Page 6 City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 6 City of Chula Vista Staff Report File#:16-0448, Item#: A. OATHS OF OFFICE Eric BanataoInternational Friendship Commission Juan CervantesSafety Commission Pat Mallen Commission on Aging Jose Torres Veterans Advisory Commission City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 7 City of Chula Vista Staff Report File#:16-0432, Item#: B. PRESENTATIONBYTHECULTURALARTSCOMMISSIONOFTHECOMMUNITYMURALCREATEDAT HARBORFEST 2016 FOR INSTALLATION AT CITY HALL City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 8 City of Chula Vista Staff Report File#:16-0453, Item#: C. INTRODUCTIONOFCHULAVISTA'SINAUGURALYOUTHAMBASSADORTOOURSISTERCITY, CEBU,PHILIPPINES,LEIRAMAEDIGMA,BYINTERNATIONALFRIENDSHIPCOMMISSIONVICE CHAIRFRANCINEMAIGUEANDPRESENTATIONOFTHEIRATTENDANCEATTHEFILIPINA LEADERSHIP GLOBAL SUMMIT HELD IN CEBU, PHILIPPINES City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 9 City of Chula Vista Staff Report File#:16-0446, Item#: 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of August 16, 2016. RECOMMENDED ACTION Council approve the minutes. City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 10 City of Chula Vista Meeting Minutes - Draft 5:00 PM Council Chambers 276 4th Avenue, Building A Chula Vista, CA 91910 Tuesday, August 16, 2016 REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CALL TO ORDER A Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista was called to order at 5:03 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located in City Hall, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California. ROLL CALL: Present:Councilmember Aguilar, Councilmember Bensoussan, Councilmember McCann, Deputy Mayor Miesen and Mayor Casillas Salas Deputy Mayor Miesen left the meeting at 6:10 p.m. due to abstaining from participating in the final item on the agenda. Also Present: City Manager Halbert, City Attorney Googins, City Clerk Norris, and Assistant City Clerk Bigelow PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG AND MOMENT OF SILENCE Deputy Mayor Miesen led the Pledge of Allegiance. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY A.16-0387 INTRODUCTION OF CHULA VISTA’S SISTER CITY, ODAWARA, JAPAN’S, YOUTH AMBASSADORS: RYOTA SAJI, IKUMI WATARAI, RITO HOSOYA AND IZUMI KIKUCHI, PARTICIPANTS IN THE ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL FRIENDSHIP COMMISSION’S EXCHANGE PROGRAM; AND A PRESENTATION BY THE CHULA VISTA YOUTH AMBASSADORS: BIANCA ELENA QUILANTAN, MIYUKI SOPHIA MCCLELLAN, LUCIO ALEJANDRO LIRA AND VIRGINIA PEREZ-GONZALEZ, REGARDING THEIR EXPERIENCE IN ODAWARA Mayor Casillas Salas welcomed the youth ambassadors from Odawara, Japan. International Friendship Commission Chair Gene Yee spoke regarding the program and participants. Chula Vista Youth Ambassadors Bianca Quilantan, Miyuki McClellan, Lucio Lira, and Virginia Perez-Gonzalez introduced Odawara, Japan Youth Ambassadors Ryota Saji, Ikumi Watarai, Rito Hosoya, and Izumi Kikuchi. B.16-0371 PRESENTATION OF A PROCLAMATION TO CALIFORNIA PROSTATE CANCER COALITION BOARD MEMBER CHAD LITTLE PROCLAIMING SEPTEMBER 2016 AS PROSTATE CANCER AWARENESS MONTH IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Mayor Casillas Salas read the proclamation and Councilmember Bensoussan presented it to Mr. Little. Mr. Little spoke regarding prostate cancer awareness. Page 1City of Chula Vista 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 11 August 16, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft C.16-0389 PRESENTATION BY THE GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION OF THE CERTIFICATE OF ACHIEVEMENT FOR EXCELLENCE IN FINANCIAL REPORTING AWARD FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2015 TO FINANCE DIRECTOR DAVID BILBY Mayor Casillas Salas announced that the City had received a Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting award from the Government Finance Officers Association. City Manager Halbert spoke regarding the award and commended Finance Director Bilby. Finance Director Bilby provided information regarding the requirements for the award and recognized the Finance Department. CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 1 - 8) Item 3 was removed from the Consent Calendar at the request of a member of the public. 1.16-0408 APPROVAL OF MINUTES of August 9, 2016. Recommended Action: Council approve the minutes. 2.16-0406 ORDINANCE NO. 3372 OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTERN URBAN CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN PLAN (FORM BASED CODE) FOR 207 ACRES OF LAND IN THE EASTERN URBAN CENTER PORTION OF THE OTAY RANCH RELATING TO THE RELOCATION OF THE MILLENIA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SITE, DELETION OF A PORTION OF MONTAGE AVENUE, REVISING THE PARKING RATES AND STANDARDS AND CLARIFYING THE APPROVAL PROCESS FOR THE PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN, SUBSEQUENT PARKING RATES, AND FUTURE STREET DELETIONS (SECOND READING AND ADOPTION) Recommended Action: Council adopt the ordinance. Item 3 was removed from the Consent Calendar. 4.16-0373 RESOLUTION NO. 2016-172 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH TYLER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION AND LEASING OF ENTERPRISE RESOURCE PLANNING SOFTWARE, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS ACCORDINGLY (4/5 VOTE REQUIRED) Recommended Action: Council adopt the resolution. Page 2City of Chula Vista 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 12 August 16, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft 5.16-0378 RESOLUTION NO. 2016-173 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF TWO DUMP TRUCKS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF NATIONAL JOINT POWERS ASSOCIATION CONTRACT NUMBER 102811 AND THE ISSUANCE OF A PURCHASE ORDER TO NATIONAL AUTO FLEET GROUP IN THE AMOUNT OF $250,621 Recommended Action: Council adopt the resolution. 6.16-0384 INVESTMENT REPORT FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 2016 Recommended Action: Council accept the report. 7.16-0385 A.RESOLUTION NO. 2016-174 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING THE 2015/2016 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT ON CITIZEN OVERSIGHT BOARDS OF POLICE BEHAVIOR AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE RESPONSE ON BEHALF OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL B.RESOLUTION NO. 2016-175 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING THE 2015/2016 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT ON THE CHULA VISTA JAIL AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE RESPONSE ON BEHALF OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL Recommended Action: Council adopt the resolutions. 8.16-0386 RESOLUTION NO. 2016-176 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE AUTHORIZED STAFFING LEVEL OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO REFLECT THE ADDITION OF 2.0 POLICE SERGEANT POSITIONS AND THE ELIMINATION OF 2.0 POLICE AGENT POSITIONS Recommended Action: Council adopt the resolution. Approval of the Consent Calendar A motion was made by Councilmember McCann, seconded by Councilmember Bensoussan, to approve staff's recommendations on the above Consent Calendar items, headings read, text waived. The motion carried by the following vote: ACTION: Yes:Aguilar, Bensoussan, McCann, Miesen and Casillas Salas5 - No:0 Abstain:0 Page 3City of Chula Vista 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 13 August 16, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR 3.16-0323 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DELETING SECTION 15.24.070, SMALL RESIDENTIAL ROOFTOP SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS, OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE AND ADDING CHAPTER 15.29, EXPEDITED PERMIT PROCESSING, RELATED TO PERMITS FOR SMALL RESIDENTIAL ROOFTOP SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS AND ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS, TO THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE (FIRST READING) Vanessa Garcia, representing SDG&E, spoke in support of staff's recommendation on the item. A motion was made by Councilmember McCann, seconded by Councilmember Bensoussan, that the above ordinance be placed on first reading, heading read, text waived. The motion carried by the following vote: ACTION: Yes:Aguilar, Bensoussan, McCann, Miesen and Casillas Salas5 - No:0 Abstain:0 PUBLIC COMMENTS Steven Pavka, Chula Vista resident, expressed concern regarding issues related to homelessness and towing fees. Mark Twohey, representing the Youth Sports Council, thanked the Council for its support and reported on local youth sports standings. He paid tribute to Olympicos Soccer Club player Alexis Sepulveda. Mayor Casillas Salas stated that Item 9 had been noticed as time certain for 6:00 p.m. and that the item would be taken out of order following City Manager's and Mayor's Reports, and Councilmembers' Comments. CITY MANAGER’S REPORTS City Manager Halbert provided an update on the Bayfront development. MAYOR’S REPORTS 10.16-0403 RATIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT OF JAMES MERINO TO THE HOUSING ADVISORY COMMISSION AND JASON PRATER TO THE CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION A motion was made by Councilmember McCann, seconded by Councilmember Bensoussan, that the above appointments be ratified. The motion carried by the following vote: ACTION: Yes:Aguilar, Bensoussan, McCann, Miesen and Casillas Salas5 - No:0 Abstain:0 Mayor Casillas Salas reported that Park View Little League won the Western Regional Championship and would play in the Little League World Series, and that Bonita Valley Girls Softball 12 and under were the 2016 National Champions. Page 4City of Chula Vista 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 14 August 16, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft Mayor Casillas Salas spoke regarding her attendance at the recent Stylus Park opening and Odawara Youth Ambassadors welcome reception. She announced the following openings of new Chula Vista businesses: T.I.P. Services on Quintard St. and Valero Gas Station on Palomar St. at Interstate 5. She congratulated Benjamin Walker for his recent recognition at an Eagle Scout Court of Honor ceremony. COUNCILMEMBERS’ COMMENTS Deputy Mayor Miesen spoke regarding the recent Stylus Park opening. Councilmember McCann stated he attended the recent Stylus Park opening, a work party at the Veterans Home where volunteers assisted with maintenance needs, the Chamber of Commerce trade show, and various school openings. Councilmember Bensoussan spoke regarding the upcoming HarborFest and thanked the event sponsors. Mayor Casillas Salas recessed the meeting at 5:45 p.m. The Council reconvened at 6:02 p.m., with all members present. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9.16-0372 CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL BY THE CORRIDOR COALITION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S DECISION TO ADOPT AN ADDENDUM TO URBAN CORE SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FEIR 06-01 AND APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW (URBAN CORE DEVELOPMENT) PERMIT DR15-0015 TO REDEVELOP THE SITE AT 795 THIRD AVENUE WITH 71 RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS AND ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS AND TENTATIVE MAP PCS15-006 TO CONSOLIDATE TWO PARCELS INTO ONE CONDOMINIUM LOT FOR 71 RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND ONE COMMERCIAL UNIT FOR INDIVIDUAL OWNERSHIP ON 795 THIRD AVENUE, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS CONTAINED THEREIN RESOLUTION NO. 2016-177 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DENYING THE APPEAL BY THE CORRIDOR COALITION AND REAFFIRMING THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S ADOPTION OF THE ADDENDUM TO URBAN CORE SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FEIR 06-01 AND APPROVAL OF DESIGN REVIEW (URBAN CORE DEVELOPMENT) PERMIT DR15-0015 TO REDEVELOP THE SITE AT 795 THIRD AVENUE WITH 71 RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS AND ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS AND APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE MAP PCS15-006 TO CONSOLIDATE TWO PARCELS INTO ONE CONDOMINIUM LOT FOR 71 RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND ONE COMMERCIAL UNIT FOR INDIVIDUAL OWNERSHIP ON 795 THIRD AVENUE, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS CONTAINED THEREIN Page 5City of Chula Vista 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 15 August 16, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft Notice of the hearing was given in accordance with legal requirements, and the hearing was held on the date and no earlier than the time specified in the notice. Mayor Casillas Salas introduced the item and explained the proceedings. Deputy Mayor Miesen stated he would abstain from participating and voting on the item due to a potential conflict of interest related to a business entity in which he had a financial interest. He left the meeting at 6:10 p.m. Mayor Casillas Salas requested the Council disclose ex parte communications. Councilmember McCann reported on his communications with Dr. Mani and John Wainio. He stated he attended a presentation by Humberto Peraza regarding the project through the Chula Vista Chamber of [Commerce] Public Policy Committee. He also stated he met with Earl Jentz, Tino Martinez and his spouse, and several members of the community. Mayor Casillas Salas stated that on June 30, 2016, she met with John Wainio and Humberto Peraza on a matter other than the proposed project but that the possibility of an appeal came up during the meeting. She stated that on July 19, 2016, she met with Earl Jentz. Also on July 19, 2016, she met with James Tingle and other members of the Chula Vista Corridor Coalition. Councilmember Bensoussan stated she met with James Tingle and two of his neighbors on August 15, 2016. She met in early spring 2016 with Dr. Mani and Humberto Peraza. She stated she had received email communications in support of and opposition to the project, and that the emails had been forwarded to the City Clerk and were entered into the record. Councilmember Aguilar stated she received numerous written communications on the proposed project, estimated at close to 100, and that the overwhelming majority were opposed to the proposed project, one or two asked factual questions regarding the proposed project, and a few were in favor of the proposed project. She stated she visited the proposed project site many times and drove around the neighborhood. Councilmember Aguilar reported that she met with Dr. Mani in December 2015 and Earl Jentz on May 6, 2016. She stated she attended a meeting of the Crossroads II Board of Directors in July 2016, at which the project was on the agenda. She met with Mr. Tingle, Ms. Vainik and two other neighbors, and she spoke with community members by phone, including Tino Martinez, a representative at Studio E, and approximately 20 other individuals. City Attorney Googins recommended that Councilmembers report any communications or facts that were material to their decision during the deliberation on the item so that everyone would have the benefit of the information. Councilmember Bensoussan stated that it was reported to her by members of the community that Councilmember Aguilar’s office had sent two email messages that were produced by the Crossroads II organization in advocacy against the project. Councilmember Aguilar spoke regarding the email messages referenced by Councilmember Bensoussan and stated the messages did not support or oppose the project. Senior Planner Tapia and Principal Planner Power gave a presentation on the item. Senior Planner Tapia and Director of Development Services Broughton responded to questions from the Council regarding the proposed project’s public plaza and the project findings. Mayor Casillas Salas opened the public hearing. Page 6City of Chula Vista 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 16 August 16, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft Steve Danon with The San Diego Group and Eric Naslund with Studio E Architects, representing Dr. Hamid Mani, the applicant, gave a presentation in support of staff’s recommendation on the item and responded to questions from the Council. The following members of the public spoke in support of staff’s recommendation: - Estela Ruiz, Chula Vista resident - Chris Lewis, Bonita resident - Ronda Rodriguez, Chula Vista resident - Randy Bellamy, Chula Vista resident - Christine Moore, Chula Vista resident - Richard D’Ascoli, representing the Pacific Southwest Association of Realtors - Max Zaker, Chula Vista resident - Mike Spethman, Chula Vista resident - Lisa Cohen, Chula Vista resident, representing the Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce - Tom Money, Chula Vista resident Ana Melgoza, Chula Vista resident, representing the San Ysidro Health Center, spoke regarding Dr. Mani’s partnership with the organization and the no-cost treatments he provided their program participants who could not afford to pay. Mayor Casillas Salas recessed the meeting at 8:25 p.m. The Council reconvened at 8:50 p.m., with Councilmembers Bensoussan and McCann, and Mayor Casillas Salas present. Councilmember Aguilar arrived at 8:51 p.m. Mayor Casillas Salas announced she had received the following names of individuals who indicated they were part of the organized presentation in opposition to staff’s recommendation, which would be presented by Evelyn Heidelberg and Will Rogers, representing the Corridor Coalition: -Joan Berg, Chula Vista resident -Marty Coulson, Chula Vista resident -Penny Vaughn, Chula Vista resident -Earl Jentz, Chula Vista resident -Karen Jentz, Chula Vista resident -Larry Boyle, Chula Vista resident -Anne K. Pering, Chula Vista resident -Pandra Boyle, Chula Vista resident -Robert Sullivan, Chula Vista resident -Helen Thompson, Chula Vista resident -G. Loffredo, Chula Vista resident -Lydia Morales, Chula Vista resident -Cesar J. Morales, Chula Vista resident -Margarita Morales, Chula Vista resident -Lucy S. Aginiga, Chula Vista resident -Alberto Rivas, Chula Vista resident -Marcela Rivas, Chula Vista resident -Antonio Rivas, Chula Vista resident Evelyn Heidelberg and Will Rogers, representing the Corridor Coalition, gave presentations on the project in opposition to staff’s recommendation and responded to questions from the Council. Martha Coulson stated she wished to speak as an individual and not be represented by the organized group. Mayor Casillas Salas stated she would be heard following speaker Paula Perry. Mayor Casillas Salas restated the names she had received of individuals who indicated they wished to be represented by the organized presentation made by Ms. Heidelberg and Mr. Rogers. She invited anyone to come forward who desired an individual opportunity to speak. The names were as follows: Page 7City of Chula Vista 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 17 August 16, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft Joan Berg, Penny Vaughn, Earl Jentz, Karen Jentz, Larry Boyle, Anne K. Pering, Pandra Boyle, Robert Sullivan, Helen Thompson, G. Loffredo, Lydia Morales, Cesar Morales, Margarita Morales, Lucy S. Aginiga, Alberto Rivas, Marcela Rivas, and Antonio Rivas. Lydia Morales stated she wished to speak as an individual and not be represented by the organized group. Mayor Casillas Salas stated she would be given an opportunity to speak. There were no others who indicated a desire to speak individually. The following members of the public spoke in opposition to staff’s recommendation: - James Tingle, Chula Vista resident - Paula Perry, Chula Vista resident - Marty Coulson, Chula Vista resident - Theresa Acerro, Chula Vista resident - Lydia Morales, Chula Vista resident - Tino Martinez, Chula Vista resident - Patricia Vainik, Chula Vista resident - Julie Andre, Chula Vista resident - Stacy Bridges, Chula Vista resident - Jackie Lancaster, Chula Vista resident - Gwen McCarghey, Chula Vista resident - Glenda de Vaney, Chula Vista resident - Judi Bounds, Chula Vista resident - Dario Martinez, Chula Vista resident - William Richter, Chula Vista resident - Gloria Gonzales, Chula Vista resident - Andrea Boggs, Chula Vista resident The following members of the public submitted written documentation in opposition to staff’s recommendation but were not present to speak when their names were called: -Angela Martinez, Chula Vista resident -Pam Keel, Chula Vista resident -Benaiah Pemberton, Chula Vista resident -Kathy Day, Chula Vista resident Mayor Casillas Salas announced the following individuals had submitted written documentation in opposition to staff’s recommendation and indicated that they did not wish to speak: - Jerry Boyd, Chula Vista resident - John Hubler, Chula Vista resident - Sheree Hubler, Chula Vista resident - Herendira Vazquez, Chula Vista resident - Alexander Vazquez, Chula Vista resident - Weichang Szeto, Chula Vista resident - Pei Yao Yu, Chula Vista resident - Sharron Hall, Chula Vista resident - Steven C. Pavka, Chula Vista resident Mayor Casillas Salas said that several letters in opposition had been received from individuals who had also spoken regarding the item. She also stated that two letters in support of staff’s recommendation had been received and that all of the written communications had been provided to the Council. Richard Schulman and Eric Naslund, representing the applicant, responded to speakers’ comments regarding the proposed project. Mayor Casillas Salas closed the public hearing. Page 8City of Chula Vista 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 18 August 16, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft Senior Planner Tapia provided additional information regarding the project in response to speakers’ comments. Council discussion ensued regarding the item. Councilmember McCann moved to adopt the resolution. Mayor Casillas Salas seconded the motion. City Attorney Googins stated that the record of the proceeding included the written staff report and supporting documents that were presented to the Planning Commission, the audio recording of the Planning Commission deliberations on the item that was distributed with the Council agenda packet and was available on the City's website, the written information that staff received in time to include in the agenda packet, and the written communications received later, which were distributed to the Council on the dais. City Attorney Googins said that the applicant had offered a specific implementation measure to address privacy concerns and recommended that the Council include the condition in its action, if it so desired. Development Services Director Broughton restated the condition to address privacy concerns, which was that the balconies be designed in substantial conformance with the statements made during this public hearing, where the developer represented the heights and opaqueness of the railing, which would be designed to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director. Councilmember McCann modified his motion to include the condition regarding the balconies, as stated by Development Services Director Broughton. Mayor Casillas Salas, as seconder of the motion, agreed. Development Services Director Broughton read a neighborhood enhancement proposal offered by the developer, which was as follows: “The applicant agrees to offer landscape improvements consisting of ground covers, street trees, and irrigation along the east side of 3rd Avenue, starting approximately 100 feet south of L Street and continuing south for approximately 500 feet, to enhance the visual quality of the Third Avenue Corridor in this location. This work would be subject to the approval of the Development Services Director and the authorization by the San Diego Country Club. If authorization is not granted by the San Diego Country Club, the applicant agrees to offer a comparable substitute neighborhood amenity to be approved by the Development Services Director.” Councilmember McCann further modified his original motion to also include the condition regarding the neighborhood amenity, as stated by Development Services Director Broughton. Mayor Casillas Salas, as seconder of the motion, agreed. City Attorney Googins spoke regarding an additional modification suggested by staff in response to a question from Councilmember Aguilar, which would ensure public access to the project’s plaza in perpetuity. Richard Schulman, representing the applicant, agreed to the proposed modification to the language regarding the plaza, and other modifications as project conditions, as stated. Director of Development Services Broughton suggested the condition, as augmented by City Attorney Googins and City Manager Halbert, be to record a public access easement, or such other mechanism as may be approved by the City Attorney, over the plaza at the corner of 3rd and K Street to provide public access in perpetuity, and that the improvements would be maintained by the property owner. City Attorney Googins stated that the modification including those elements would be drafted into a final condition. Councilmember McCann further modified his original motion to also include the condition regarding public access to the owner-maintained plaza in perpetuity. Mayor Casillas Salas, as seconder of the motion, agreed. Page 9City of Chula Vista 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 19 August 16, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft A motion was made by Councilmember McCann, seconded by Mayor Casillas Salas, that Resolution No. 2016-177 be adopted as amended to include the conditions related to the heights and opaqueness of the balcony railings, neighborhood enhancement along a portion of the Third Avenue Corridor, and public access to the owner-maintained plaza in perpetuity. The heading was read, text waived. The motion carried by the following vote: ACTION: Yes:Bensoussan, McCann and Casillas Salas3 - No:Aguilar1 - Abstain:Miesen1 - ADJOURNMENT At 11:36 p.m., Mayor Casillas Salas adjourned the meeting to the Regular City Council Meeting on September 13, 2016, at 5:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers. _______________________________ Kerry K. Bigelow, Assistant City Clerk Page 10City of Chula Vista 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 20 City of Chula Vista Staff Report File#:16-0449, Item#: 2. ORDINANCEOFTHECITYOFCHULAVISTAAMENDINGCHULAVISTAMUNICIPALCODE SECTION2.05.010RELATINGTOTHEESTABLISHMENTOFUNCLASSIFIEDPOSITIONSTO ADDFAPROGRAMASSISTANTSUPERVISOR(SECONDREADINGANDADOPTION)(4/5VOTE REQUIRED) RECOMMENDED ACTION Council adopt the ordinance. SUMMARY TheHighIntensityDrugTraffickingArea(“HIDTA”)DirectorisrequestingtoaddfiveFA(FiscalAgent) positionstotheauthorizedstaffinglevelattheSanDiegoLawEnforcementCoordinationCenter. Thesepositionsarefullyreimbursedbygrantfunds,alongwitha4%administrativefeeforactingas the fiscal agent. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Environmental Notice Theactivityisnota“Project”asdefinedunderSection15378oftheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQuality ActStateGuidelines;therefore,pursuanttoStateGuidelinesSection15060(c)(3)noenvironmental review is required. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Not Applicable. DISCUSSION ThePoliceDepartmentactsasthefiscalagentforvariouslawenforcementprogramswhichare fundedthroughvariousStateandFederalagencies.Asthefiscalagent,thePoliceDepartmenthires andprovidessalaryandbenefitsforpositionswhicharenormallyconsideredseparatefromexisting Citystaffingandareatwillpositions.Thesepositionsaredesignatedas“FA”(“FiscalAgent”)inthe title description. Fivepositions(oneFASupervisingIntelligenceAnalyst,twoFASeniorIntelligenceAnalysts,oneFA IntelligenceAnalystandoneFAProgramAssistantSupervisor)arerequestedtobeaddedtothe authorizedstaffinglevelofthePoliceGrantFundtosupporttheSanDiegoLawEnforcement CoordinationCenter(“SDLECC”).TheSDLECCservesastheregionalintelligencefusioncenterfor SanDiegoandImperialcounties.FusionCentersarefocalpointsforthereceipt,analysis,gathering, andsharingofthreat-relatedinformationbetweenthefederalgovernmentandstate,local,tribal,and privatesectorpartners.ThesefivepositionsarefullyreimbursedbyeitherHighIntensityDrug TraffickingArea(HIDTA)orhomelandsecuritygrantfunds,alongwitha4%administrativefeefor acting as the fiscal agent. City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 21 File#:16-0449, Item#: 2. TheFASupervisingIntelligenceAnalystisresponsibleforthedirectmanagementandoversightof theCriticalInfrastructureProtection(CIP)Program,whowilldevelopinnovativeCIPprogram initiativesdesignedforregion-wideapplicationandsuccessfulmarketingofthoseinitiativesto regional stakeholders. ThetwoFASeniorIntelligenceAnalystsareresponsibleforresearchingandanalyzinginformationon avarietyoftopicsrelatedtocriminalactivitiesfrommultiplesources,includingopensource,law enforcement,andclassifiedsystems.Thesepositionswillidentifynewthreatsandtrendsand increase situational awareness for regional public safety personnel and organizations. TheFAIntelligenceAnalystperformsanalyticalworkinsupportofallcrimes/allhazardsasdirected bytheirsupervisor,andwillapplyanalyticalskillstonotepossiblecorrelationsbetweendisparate information streams and report this information according to LECC policy. TheFAProgramAssistantSupervisoroverseesprogramassistantstaffwhoenablethedeliveryof SDLECCtacticalandstrategicintelligenceservices,TerrorismLiaisonOfficertraining,Critical InfrastructureProgramproducts,andinvestigative,planningandtrainingsupporttolocal,tribal,state, and federal first responders against all crimes and all hazards along California’s border with Mexico. Compensation Schedule CaliforniaCodeofRegulations,Title2,Section570.5requiresthat,forpurposesofdetermininga retiringemployee'spensionallowance,thepayratebelimitedtotheamountlistedonapayschedule thatmeetscertainrequirementsandbeapprovedbythegoverningbodyinaccordancewiththe requirementsoftheapplicablepublicmeetinglaws.TheFiscalYear2016-2017Compensation Schedule("CompensationSchedule")waslastapprovedbytheCityCouncilattheirmeetingofJuly 26, 2016. ApprovalofResolutionCwillapprovetherevisedCompensationScheduletoreflecttheadditionof thenewlycreatedFAProgramAssistantSupervisorposition,incompliancewithCaliforniaCodeof Regulations, Title 2, Section 570.5. DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT Staffhasreviewedthedecisioncontemplatedbythisactionandhasdeterminedthatitisnotsite- specificandconsequently,the500-footrulefoundinCaliforniaCodeofRegulationsTitle2,section 18702.2(a)(11),isnotapplicabletothisdecisionforpurposesofdeterminingadisqualifyingreal property-relatedfinancialconflictofinterestunderthePoliticalReformAct(Cal.Gov'tCode§87100, et seq.). Staffisnotindependentlyaware,andhasnotbeeninformedbyanyCityCouncilmember,ofany other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision maker conflict of interest in this matter. LINK TO STRATEGIC GOALS TheCity’sStrategicPlanhasfivemajorgoals:OperationalExcellence,EconomicVitality,Healthy Community,StrongandSecureNeighborhoodsandaConnectedCommunity.Thesenewpositions supportthegoalofOperationalExcellencebyprovidingadditionalresourcestomeetHIDTAgoals City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 22 File#:16-0449, Item#: 2. and objectives. CURRENT YEAR FISCAL IMPACT ApprovalofResolutionAwillresultintheamendmentofthecompensationscheduleand classificationplantoaddtheclassificationofFAProgramAssistantSupervisor.Thisnew classificationisanat-willpositionandwillbeeliminatedifgrantfundingends.TheFAProgram AssistantSupervisorwillbeassignedtotheProfessionalUnclassified(PRUC)group.TheE-Stepbi- weekly salary for this position will be $2,884.62. ApprovalofResolutionAwillalsoaddoneFASupervisingIntelligenceAnalyst,twoFASenior IntelligenceAnalysts,oneFAIntelligenceAnalystandoneFAProgramAssistantSupervisortothe authorizedstaffingleveloftheSanDiegoLawEnforcementCoordinationCenter,resultinginan appropriationof$464,396tothepersonnelcategoryand$18,576totheOtherExpensescategoryof thePoliceGrantFund.ThepersonnelcostsarefullyreimbursedbyHIDTAandhomelandsecurity grantfunds.TheCityreceivesa4%administrativefeeforactingasthefiscalintermediaryforthese positions.Becauseofthe4%administrativefee,thereisapositiveimpactof$18,576totheGeneral Fund in the current fiscal year. ApprovaloftheOrdinancewillamendChulaVistaMunicipalCode2.05.010toreflecttheadditionof FA Program Assistant Supervisor. ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT Theongoingannualcostforthesefivepositionsisapproximately$619,000.Thepersonnelcostsare fullyreimbursedbyHIDTAandhomelandsecuritygrantfunds,andtheCityreceivesa4% administrativefeeforactingasthefiscalintermediaryforthesepositions.Becauseofthe4% administrativefee,therewillbeapositiveimpactofapproximately$24,760totheGeneralFundeach fiscal year. If the grant no longer funds these positions, then they will be eliminated. ATTACHMENTS Revised Fiscal Year 2016-2017 Compensation Schedule Effective September 16, 2016 Staff Contact: Jonathan Alegre City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 23 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2.05.010 RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF UNCLASSIFIED POSITIONS TO ADD FA PROGRAM ASSISTANT SUPERVISOR WHEREAS, the Human Resources Department has created new classifications to better reflect the needs of the City’s workforce; and WHEREAS, Chula Vista City Charter Section 500(a) requires that all new unclassified management level positions be adopted by ordinance and a four-fifths vote of the Council. NOW,THEREFORE,the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain as follows: Section I.That Section 2.05.010 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.05.10Unclassified positions established. In In addition to those unclassified positions specifically delineated in Section 500 of the Charter of the City, there are established the unclassified positions entitled: Administrative Secretary (Mayor, At Will),Administrative Services Manager, Animal Care Facility Administrator, Animal Care Facility Manager, Assistant Chief of Police, Assistant Director of Development Services, Assistant Director of Engineering, Assistant Director of Human Resources, Assistant Director of Finance, Assistant Director of Public Works, Assistant Director of Recreation, Budget and Analysis Manager, Building Official/Code Enforcement Manager, Chief of Staff, Chief Sustainability Officer, CityEngineer, Constituent Services Manager, Deputy City Manager, Deputy Fire Chief, Development Services Department Director, Director of Conservation and Environmental Services, Director of Economic Development, Fire Division Chief, FA Accounting Technician, FA Administrative Analyst I, FA Administrative Analyst II, FA Analyst, FA DeputyExecutive Director, FA Executive Director, FA Public Private Partnership and Exercise Program Manager,FA Director of San Diego Law Enforcement Coordination Center, FA Executive Assistant, FA Financial Manager, FA Geospatial Intelligence Analyst, FA Graphics Designer/Webmaster, FA Information Security Program Manager, FA IVDC-LECC Executive Director, FA Law Enforcement Coordination Center Information Technology Manager, FA Intelligence Analyst, FA Management Assistant, FA Microcomputer Specialist, FA Network Administrator I, FA Network Administrator II, FA Program Analyst, FA Program Assistant Supervisor, FA Program Manager, FA Network Engineer, FA Senior Financial Analyst, FA Senior Intelligence Analyst, FA Senior Secretary, FA Supervisory Intelligence Analyst, Finance and Purchasing Manager, Housing Manager, Human Resources Operations Manager, Information Technology Manager, Law Office Manager, Office Specialist (Mayor’s Office), Performance and Organizational Development Manager, Planning Manager, Police Administrative Services Administrator, Police Captain, Policy Aide, Purchasing Agent, Real Property Manager, Redevelopment and Housing Manager, Risk Manager, Senior Council Assistant, and Traffic Engineer. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 24 Ordinance No. Page No. 2 Section II.Severability If any portion of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstance, is for any reason held to be invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional, by a court of competent jurisdiction, that portion shall be deemed severable, and such invalidity, unenforceability or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining portions of the Ordinance, or its application to any other person or circumstance. The City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby declares that it would have adopted each section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, sentences, clauses or phrases of the Ordinance be declared invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional. Section III. Construction The City Council of the City of Chula Vista intends this Ordinance to supplement, not to duplicate or contradict, applicable state and federal law and this Ordinance shall be construed in light of that intent. Section IV. Effective Date This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force on the thirtieth day after its final passage. Section V. Publication The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published or posted according to law. Presented by Approved as to form by Gary Halbert Glen R. Googins City Manager City Attorney 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 25 Fiscal Year 2016‐2017 Compensation Schedule Effective September 16, 2016 POSITION TITLEPCNBARGStep AStep BStep CStep DStep EStep AStep BStep CStep DStep E ACCOUNTANT3633CONF$32.56$34.19$35.90$37.69$39.58$2,604.92$2,735.16$2,871.92$3,015.52$3,166.29 ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT3641CVEA$19.92$20.91$21.96$23.06$24.21$1,593.37$1,673.03$1,756.69$1,844.52$1,936.75 ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT (HRLY)3640UCHR$19.92$20.91$21.96$23.06$24.21$1,593.37$1,673.03$1,756.69$1,844.52$1,936.75 ACCOUNTING TECH (HOURLY)3676UCHR$25.20$26.45$27.78$29.17$30.62$2,015.61$2,116.39$2,222.21$2,333.32$2,449.99 ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN3643CONF$25.20$26.45$27.78$29.17$30.62$2,015.61$2,116.39$2,222.21$2,333.32$2,449.99 ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN3675CVEA$25.20$26.45$27.78$29.17$30.62$2,015.60$2,116.38$2,222.20$2,333.31$2,449.98 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE SUPERVISOR3645CVEA$28.97$30.42$31.94$33.54$35.22$2,317.95$2,433.85$2,555.54$2,683.32$2,817.48 ADMIN SECRETARY (MAYOR,ATWILL)0154CONF$24.61$25.84$27.14$28.49$29.92$1,969.05$2,067.50$2,170.87$2,279.42$2,393.39 ADMIN SERVICES MANAGER0215SM$44.59 ‐‐‐$54.20$3,567.48 ‐‐‐$4,336.30 ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY0149CONF$24.61$25.84$27.14$28.49$29.92$1,969.05$2,067.50$2,170.87$2,279.42$2,393.39 ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY0179CVEA$24.61$25.84$27.14$28.49$29.92$1,969.05$2,067.50$2,170.87$2,279.42$2,393.39 ADMINISTRATIVE TECH (HOURLY)0127UCHR$24.61$25.84$27.14$28.49$29.92$1,969.05$2,067.50$2,170.87$2,279.42$2,393.39 ADMINISTRATIVE TECHNICIAN0147CONF$24.61$25.84$27.14$28.49$29.92$1,969.05$2,067.50$2,170.87$2,279.42$2,393.39 ADMINISTRATIVE TECHNICIAN0181CVEA$24.61$25.84$27.14$28.49$29.92$1,969.05$2,067.50$2,170.87$2,279.42$2,393.39 ANIMAL ADOPTION COUNSELOR5310CVEA$21.30$22.36$23.48$24.66$25.89$1,703.86$1,789.05$1,878.50$1,972.43$2,071.05 ANIMAL CARE AIDE (HRLY)5316UCHR$11.32$11.91$12.55$13.20$13.90$905.56$953.01$1,003.78$1,056.21$1,111.98 ANIMAL CARE FAC ADMINISTRATOR5327SM$51.96$54.56$57.28$60.15$63.16$4,156.65$4,364.48$4,582.70$4,811.84$5,052.43 ANIMAL CARE SPECIALIST 5343CVEA$17.86$18.75$19.69$20.67$21.71$1,428.71$1,500.15$1,575.16$1,653.92$1,736.61 ANIMAL CARE SPECIALIST (HRLY)5344UCHR$17.86$18.75$19.69$20.67$21.71$1,428.72$1,500.16$1,575.17$1,653.93$1,736.62 ANIMAL CARE SUPERVISOR 5319CVEA$24.80$26.04$27.34$28.71$30.14$1,983.93$2,083.13$2,187.29$2,296.65$2,411.48 ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICER 5303CVEA$21.43$22.50$23.63$24.81$26.05$1,714.46$1,800.18$1,890.19$1,984.70$2,083.93 ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICER (HRLY)5305UCHR$21.43$22.50$23.63$24.81$26.05$1,714.46$1,800.18$1,890.19$1,984.70$2,083.93 ANIMAL CTRL OFFCR SUPERVISOR 5304CVEA$24.65$25.88$27.17$28.53$29.96$1,971.62$2,070.20$2,173.71$2,282.40$2,396.52 ANIMAL SERVICES SPECIALIST 5309CVEA$19.48$20.46$21.48$22.55$23.68$1,558.60$1,636.53$1,718.36$1,804.27$1,894.49 APPLICATIONS SUPP SPEC HRLY 3078UCHR$33.18$34.84$36.58$38.41$40.33$2,654.59$2,787.32$2,926.68$3,073.02$3,226.67 APPLICATIONS SUPPORT MANAGER3083MM$41.37$43.44$45.61$47.89$50.28$3,309.38$3,474.85$3,648.59$3,831.02$4,022.57 APPLICATIONS SUPPORT SPEC 3088PROF$33.18$34.84$36.58$38.41$40.33$2,654.59$2,787.32$2,926.68$3,073.02$3,226.67 AQUARIST 7741CVEA$22.18$23.29$24.46$25.68$26.96$1,774.71$1,863.44$1,956.61$2,054.45$2,157.17 AQUATIC SUPERVISOR I 7579CVEA$22.75$23.89$25.08$26.34$27.65$1,820.11$1,911.11$2,006.67$2,107.00$2,212.35 AQUATIC SUPERVISOR II 7577CVEA$25.03$26.28$27.59$28.97$30.42$2,002.11$2,102.22$2,207.33$2,317.69$2,433.58 AQUATIC SUPERVISOR III 7575CVEA$28.78$30.22$31.73$33.32$34.98$2,302.44$2,417.56$2,538.44$2,665.36$2,798.63 ASSISTANT CITY CLERK 2210SM$39.18$41.13$43.19$45.35$47.62$3,134.05$3,290.75$3,455.28$3,628.04$3,809.54 ASSISTANT DIR OF DEV SERVICES 4040SM$65.71 ‐$75.93 ‐$79.87$5,256.51 ‐$6,074.22 ‐$6,389.32 ASSOC ACCOUNTANT 3635CONF$35.82$37.61$39.49$41.46$43.54$2,865.40$3,008.67$3,159.10$3,317.06$3,482.91 ASSOC ENGINEER 6017WCE$39.22$41.18$43.24$45.40$47.67$3,137.28$3,294.14$3,458.85$3,631.79$3,813.38 ASSOC LAND SURVEYOR 6287WCE$39.22$41.18$43.24$45.40$47.67$3,137.28$3,294.14$3,458.85$3,631.79$3,813.38 ASSOC PLAN CHECK ENGINEER 4747WCE$39.22$41.18$43.24$45.40$47.67$3,137.28$3,294.14$3,458.85$3,631.79$3,813.38 ASSOC PLANNER 4437CVEA$32.29$33.90$35.59$37.37$39.24$2,582.83$2,711.97$2,847.57$2,989.95$3,139.45 ASSOC PLANNER (HOURLY)4438UCHR$32.29$33.90$35.59$37.37$39.24$2,582.83$2,711.97$2,847.57$2,989.95$3,139.45 ASST CHIEF OF POLICE 5011SM$64.46 ‐‐‐$78.35$5,156.42 ‐‐‐$6,267.66 ASST CITY ATTORNEY 2405SM$68.82$72.26$75.87$79.62$83.65$5,505.54$5,780.82$6,069.86$6,369.97$6,692.02 ASST CITY MANAGER/ADMIN 2707EXEC$89.04 ‐‐‐$107.56$7,123.21 ‐‐‐$8,604.47 ASST DIR HUMAN RESOURCES 3304SM$59.95 ‐‐‐$71.94$4,795.78 ‐‐‐$5,754.93 ASST DIR OF FINANCE 3604SM$59.59 ‐‐‐$71.94$4,766.80 ‐‐‐$5,754.93 ASST DIR OF PUBLIC WORKS 6322SM$63.08 ‐‐$74.47$76.15$5,046.27 ‐‐$5,957.44$6,092.31 ASST DIR OF RECREATION 7401SM$49.22 ‐‐‐$59.83$3,937.68 ‐‐‐$4,786.27 ASST DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING 6008SM$63.08 ‐‐‐$76.15$5,046.27 ‐‐‐$6,092.31 ASST ENGINEER 6015WCE$34.10$35.81$37.60$39.48$41.45$2,728.07$2,864.48$3,007.70$3,158.09$3,315.99 ASST LAND SURVEYOR 6289WCE$34.10$35.81$37.60$39.48$41.45$2,728.07$2,864.48$3,007.70$3,158.09$3,315.99 ASST PLAN CHECK ENGINEER 4749WCE$34.10$35.81$37.60$39.48$41.45$2,728.06$2,864.47$3,007.69$3,158.08$3,315.98 ASST PLANNER 4439CVEA$29.35$30.82$32.36$33.98$35.68$2,348.04$2,465.44$2,588.71$2,718.14$2,854.05 AUTOMATED FINGERPRINT TECH 5123CVEA$19.48$20.46$21.48$22.55$23.68$1,558.60$1,636.53$1,718.36$1,804.27$1,894.49 BENEFITS MANAGER 3404MMCF$43.95$46.15$48.45$50.87$53.42$3,515.81$3,691.60$3,876.19$4,069.99$4,273.49 BLDG PROJECT MANAGER 6412PROF$39.26$41.23$43.29$45.45$47.72$3,140.95$3,298.00$3,462.90$3,636.05$3,817.85 BUDGET & ANALYSIS MANAGER 2222SM$50.74 ‐‐‐$61.67$4,059.09 ‐‐‐$4,933.85 BUILDING INSPECTION MGR 4769MM$41.35$43.41$45.58$47.86$50.26$3,307.69$3,473.08$3,646.73$3,829.07$4,020.52 BUILDING INSPECTOR I 4771CVEA$28.42$29.84$31.33$32.90$34.55$2,273.71$2,387.40$2,506.77$2,632.11$2,763.71 BUILDING INSPECTOR II 4773CVEA$31.26$32.83$34.47$36.19$38.00$2,501.10$2,626.15$2,757.46$2,895.33$3,040.10 Hourly Rate Biweekly Rate All position titles designated as Executive (“EXEC”) or Senior Management (“SM”) have salary bands with a minimum (“Step A”) and maximum (“Step E”) salary; salary appointments and subsequent adjustments within the approved salary range may be made by the position’s appointing authority. Approved and Adopted: Resolution No.:2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 26 Fiscal Year 2016‐2017 Compensation Schedule Effective September 16, 2016 POSITION TITLEPCNBARGStep AStep BStep CStep DStep EStep AStep BStep CStep DStep E Hourly RateBiweekly Rate BUILDING INSPECTOR II HRLY4774UCHR$31.26$32.83$34.47$36.19$38.00$2,501.10$2,626.15$2,757.46$2,895.33$3,040.10 BUILDING INSPECTOR III4775CVEA$34.39$36.11$37.92$39.81$41.80$2,751.20$2,888.76$3,033.20$3,184.86$3,344.10 BUILDING OFFICIAL/CODE ENF MGR4780SM$62.58 ‐‐‐$76.06$5,006.19 ‐‐‐$6,085.07 BUSINESS LICENSE REP4505CVEA$19.92$20.91$21.96$23.06$24.21$1,593.37$1,673.03$1,756.69$1,844.52$1,936.75 CARPENTER6444CVEA$24.80$26.04$27.34$28.71$30.15$1,984.09$2,083.30$2,187.46$2,296.84$2,411.68 CHIEF OF POLICE5001EXEC$84.22 ‐‐$100.24$102.37$6,737.46 ‐‐$8,019.53$8,189.44 CHIEF OF STAFF2011MMUC$34.29$36.01$37.81$39.70$41.68$2,743.40$2,880.57$3,024.59$3,175.82$3,334.61 CHIEF SUSTAINABILITY OFFICER2729SM$59.59 ‐‐$70.34$71.94$4,766.81 ‐‐$5,627.51$5,754.93 CITY ATTORNEY (ELECTED)2400CATY ‐‐‐‐$90.89 ‐‐‐‐$7,270.81 CITY CLERK2201CCLK ‐‐‐‐$71.46 ‐‐‐‐$5,716.62 CITY ENGINEER6010SM$60.01 ‐‐‐$72.94$4,800.83 ‐‐‐$5,835.44 CITY MANAGER2710CMGR ‐‐‐‐$118.69 ‐‐‐‐$9,495.45 CIVIL BCKGRND INVEST (HOURLY)5430UCHR$23.57$24.75$25.99$27.29$28.65$1,885.90$1,980.20$2,079.21$2,183.17$2,292.33 CIVILIAN BACKGROUND INVEST5429CVEA$23.57$24.75$25.99$27.29$28.65$1,885.90$1,980.19$2,079.20$2,183.16$2,292.32 CIVILIAN POLICE INVESTIGATOR5431UCHR$25.79$27.08$28.43$29.85$31.35$2,063.15$2,166.32$2,274.63$2,388.36$2,507.78 CLERICAL AIDE0241UCHR$10.55$11.07$11.63$12.21$12.82$843.66$885.84$930.14$976.64$1,025.47 CODE ENF OFFICER I 4777CVEA$24.69$25.92$27.22$28.58$30.01$1,974.97$2,073.72$2,177.41$2,286.28$2,400.59 CODE ENF OFFICER I (HOURLY)4776UCHR$24.69$25.92$27.22$28.58$30.01$1,974.98$2,073.73$2,177.42$2,286.29$2,400.60 CODE ENF OFFICER II 4779CVEA$27.16$28.51$29.94$31.44$33.01$2,172.47$2,281.09$2,395.15$2,514.90$2,640.65 CODE ENF OFFICER II (HOURLY)4778UCHR$27.16$28.51$29.94$31.44$33.01$2,172.48$2,281.10$2,395.15$2,514.91$2,640.66 CODE ENFORCEMENT TECHNICIAN4789CVEA$21.47$22.54$23.67$24.85$26.09$1,717.37$1,803.24$1,893.40$1,988.07$2,087.47 COLLECTIONS SUPERVISOR 3683MM$34.33$36.04$37.84$39.74$41.72$2,746.06$2,883.37$3,027.54$3,178.91$3,337.86 COMMUNITY SERV OFFICER 5141CVEA$19.48$20.46$21.48$22.55$23.68$1,558.60$1,636.53$1,718.36$1,804.27$1,894.49 CONSERVATION SPECIALIST I 6200CVEA$22.44$23.57$24.74$25.98$27.28$1,795.43$1,885.21$1,979.47$2,078.44$2,182.36 CONSERVATION SPECIALIST II 6202CVEA$24.69$25.92$27.22$28.58$30.01$1,974.97$2,073.72$2,177.41$2,286.28$2,400.59 CONSTRUCTION & REPAIR SUPVSR6427CVEA$34.44$36.16$37.97$39.87$41.86$2,755.17$2,892.93$3,037.57$3,189.45$3,348.93 COUNCIL ASSISTANT 2023UCHR$22.91$24.06$25.26$26.52$27.85$1,832.86$1,924.50$2,020.73$2,121.76$2,227.85 COUNCILPERSON 2003CL ‐‐‐‐$23.99 ‐‐‐‐$1,919.49 CRIME LABORATORY MANAGER 5101MM$44.45$46.67$49.01$51.46$54.03$3,555.97$3,733.77$3,920.45$4,116.48$4,322.30 CULTURAL ARTS PROGRAM MGR 4435PROF$37.25$39.12$41.07$43.12$45.28$2,980.19$3,129.20$3,285.66$3,449.94$3,622.44 CUSTODIAL SUPERVISOR 6667CVEA$22.79$23.93$25.12$26.38$27.70$1,822.87$1,914.02$2,009.72$2,110.21$2,215.72 CUSTODIAN 6661CVEA$18.01$18.91$19.86$20.85$21.89$1,441.00$1,513.05$1,588.70$1,668.14$1,751.54 CUSTODIAN (HOURLY)6662UCHR$18.01$18.91$19.86$20.85$21.89$1,441.00$1,513.05$1,588.70$1,668.14$1,751.54 DELIVERY DRIVER 7191CVEA$16.51$17.34$18.20$19.11$20.07$1,320.92$1,386.97$1,456.32$1,529.14$1,605.59 DEP CITY MANAGER 2705EXEC$92.85 ‐‐‐$102.37$7,427.87 ‐‐‐$8,189.44 DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY I2410PRUC$41.13$43.19$45.35$47.62$50.00$3,290.63$3,455.17$3,627.92$3,809.32$3,999.79 DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY II2408PRUC$49.36$51.83$54.42$57.14$60.00$3,948.76$4,146.20$4,353.51$4,571.18$4,799.74 DEPUTY CITY ATTY III2411SM$61.95$65.05$68.30$71.71$75.30$4,956.00$5,203.80$5,463.99$5,737.19$6,024.02 DEPUTY CITY CLERK I2245PRUC$25.44$26.71$28.04$29.44$30.92$2,034.84$2,136.58$2,243.41$2,355.58$2,473.36 DEPUTY CITY CLERK II2243PRUC$27.98$29.38$30.85$32.39$34.01$2,238.33$2,350.25$2,467.76$2,591.15$2,720.71 DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF5505SM$64.08 ‐‐‐$77.89$5,126.47 ‐‐‐$6,231.27 DETENTION FACILITY MANAGER5130MM$44.45$46.67$49.01$51.46$54.03$3,555.97$3,733.77$3,920.45$4,116.48$4,322.30 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TECH I4542CVEA$20.31$21.32$22.39$23.51$24.68$1,624.51$1,705.74$1,791.03$1,880.58$1,974.61 DEVELOPMENT SVCS DEPT DIR4039EXEC$76.89 ‐‐$91.99$93.48$6,151.49 ‐‐$7,359.18$7,478.17 DEVELOPMENT SVCS TECH II4541CVEA$22.34$23.45$24.63$25.86$27.15$1,786.97$1,876.32$1,970.13$2,068.64$2,172.07 DEVELOPMENT SVCS TECH III4543CVEA$25.69$26.97$28.32$29.74$31.22$2,055.01$2,157.76$2,265.65$2,378.93$2,497.88 DEVLPMENT SVCS TECH II (HRLY)4544UCHR$22.34$23.45$24.63$25.86$27.15$1,786.97$1,876.32$1,970.13$2,068.64$2,172.07 DEVLPMT SVCS COUNTER MGR4547MM$42.88$45.02$47.27$49.64$52.12$3,430.30$3,601.81$3,781.90$3,971.00$4,169.55 DIR OF ECON DEVELOPMENT 2734EXEC$71.94 ‐‐‐$86.77$5,755.35 ‐‐‐$6,941.82 DIR OF ENG/CITY ENGINEER 6006EXEC$68.14 ‐‐‐$82.82$5,451.03 ‐‐‐$6,625.76 DIR OF FINANCE 3601EXEC$77.45 ‐$86.77 ‐$93.46$6,195.78 ‐$6,941.84 ‐$7,477.17 DIR OF HUMAN RESOURCES 3303EXEC$71.39 ‐‐‐$86.77$5,710.85 ‐‐‐$6,941.81 DIR OF INFO TECH SVCS 3001EXEC$71.39 ‐$78.70 ‐$86.77$5,710.86 ‐$6,296.22 ‐$6,941.81 DIR OF LIBRARY 7002EXEC$71.94 ‐‐‐$86.77$5,755.35 ‐‐‐$6,941.82 DIR OF PUBLIC WORKS 6320EXEC$76.22 ‐$89.86 ‐$93.46$6,097.38 ‐$7,188.46 ‐$7,477.17 DIR OF RECREATION 7405EXEC$62.14$65.25$68.51$71.94$75.53$4,971.32$5,219.88$5,480.88$5,754.92$6,042.67 DIR OF REDEVLPMENT & HOUSING4201EXEC$68.14 ‐‐‐$82.82$5,451.03 ‐‐‐$6,625.76 ELECTRICIAN 6438CVEA$26.04$27.34$28.71$30.15$31.65$2,083.31$2,187.47$2,296.85$2,411.69$2,532.27 ELECTRONIC/EQUIP INSTALLER 6492CVEA$23.67$24.86$26.10$27.41$28.78$1,893.92$1,988.61$2,088.04$2,192.45$2,302.07 ELECTRONICS TECH SUPERVISOR 6472CVEA$32.94$34.59$36.32$38.14$40.04$2,635.44$2,767.21$2,905.57$3,050.85$3,203.39 Approved and Adopted: Resolution No.:2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 27 Fiscal Year 2016‐2017 Compensation Schedule Effective September 16, 2016 POSITION TITLEPCNBARGStep AStep BStep CStep DStep EStep AStep BStep CStep DStep E Hourly RateBiweekly Rate ELECTRONICS TECHNICIAN6475CVEA$28.65$30.08$31.58$33.16$34.82$2,291.69$2,406.27$2,526.58$2,652.91$2,785.56 EMERGENCY SVCS COORDINATOR5564PROF$37.04$38.89$40.84$42.88$45.02$2,963.21$3,111.37$3,266.94$3,430.29$3,601.80 EMS NURSE COORDINATOR5567PROF$46.85$49.19$51.65$54.24$56.95$3,748.11$3,935.51$4,132.29$4,338.91$4,555.85 ENGINEERING TECH I6081CVEA$24.71$25.95$27.25$28.61$30.04$1,977.15$2,076.00$2,179.80$2,288.79$2,403.23 ENGINEERING TECH II6071CVEA$27.19$28.55$29.97$31.47$33.04$2,174.86$2,283.60$2,397.78$2,517.67$2,643.55 ENVIRON SUSTAINABILITY MGR6207MM$46.57$48.90$51.34$53.91$56.61$3,725.59$3,911.87$4,107.46$4,312.83$4,528.47 ENVIRONMENTAL HLTH SPECIALIST6129CVEA$32.68$34.32$36.04$37.84$39.73$2,614.79$2,745.53$2,882.80$3,026.94$3,178.29 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES MGR6205MM$46.57$48.90$51.34$53.91$56.61$3,725.59$3,911.87$4,107.46$4,312.83$4,528.47 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE MANAGER6505MM$36.69$38.52$40.45$42.47$44.59$2,934.93$3,081.68$3,235.76$3,397.55$3,567.43 EQUIPMENT MECHANIC6542CVEA$24.57$25.80$27.09$28.45$29.87$1,965.91$2,064.20$2,167.41$2,275.79$2,389.57 EQUIPMENT OPERATOR6361CVEA$26.15$27.46$28.84$30.28$31.79$2,092.34$2,196.95$2,306.80$2,422.14$2,543.25 EXECUTIVE SECRETARY0187CONF$29.78$31.27$32.83$34.48$36.20$2,382.55$2,501.68$2,626.76$2,758.10$2,896.00 FA ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN5270CONF$25.20$26.45$27.78$29.17$30.62$2,015.61$2,116.39$2,222.21$2,333.32$2,449.99 FA ADMIN ANALYST I5297CONF$27.67$29.06$30.51$32.04$33.64$2,213.86$2,324.56$2,440.78$2,562.82$2,690.96 FA ADMIN ANALYST II5296CONF$30.44$31.96$33.56$35.24$37.00$2,435.25$2,557.01$2,684.86$2,819.11$2,960.06 FA ANALYST5277CONF$21.15$22.20$23.31$24.48$25.70$1,691.76$1,776.35$1,865.17$1,958.43$2,056.35 FA DEPUTY DIRECTOR SD LECC5465SM$45.99 ‐‐$53.24$55.90$3,679.08 ‐‐$4,258.99$4,471.95 FA DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR5463SM$48.79 ‐‐‐$59.31$3,903.31 ‐‐‐$4,744.50 FA DIRECTOR OF SD LECC 5274SM$57.39 ‐‐‐$69.76$4,591.40 ‐‐‐$5,580.88 FA EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 5286CONF$27.09$28.45$29.87$31.36$32.93$2,167.46$2,275.83$2,389.62$2,509.10$2,634.56 FA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 5461EXEC$57.39 ‐$63.28 ‐$69.76$4,591.40 ‐$5,062.02 ‐$5,580.88 FA FINANCIAL MANAGER 5493MMUC$45.42$47.69$50.07$52.58$55.21$3,633.54$3,815.22$4,005.98$4,206.28$4,416.59 FA GEOSPATIAL INTEL ANALYST 5439PRUC$39.42$41.39$43.46$45.63$47.92$3,153.63$3,311.31$3,476.87$3,650.72$3,833.25 FA GRAPHIC DESIGNER/WBMSTR 5289CONF$28.63$30.06$31.56$33.14$34.80$2,290.07$2,404.58$2,524.81$2,651.05$2,783.60 FA INFO SECURITY PROGRAM MGR5453MMUC$45.98$48.28$50.70$53.23$55.89$3,678.72$3,862.66$4,055.79$4,258.58$4,471.51 FA INTELLIGENCE ANALYST 5485CONF$28.63$30.06$31.56$33.14$34.80$2,290.07$2,404.58$2,524.81$2,651.05$2,783.60 FA IVDC‐LECC EXEC DIRECTOR 5491SM$50.02$52.52$55.14$57.90$60.79$4,001.25$4,201.30$4,411.37$4,631.93$4,863.53 FA LECC IT MANAGER 5440MMUC$42.05$44.15$46.36$48.68$51.11$3,363.87$3,532.06$3,708.66$3,894.10$4,088.80 FA MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT 5278CONF$25.80$27.09$28.45$29.87$31.36$2,064.25$2,167.46$2,275.84$2,389.63$2,509.11 FA MICROCOMPUTER SPECIALIST 5443PRUC$34.19$35.90$37.69$39.58$41.56$2,735.03$2,871.78$3,015.37$3,166.14$3,324.45 FA NTWRK ADMINISTRATOR I 5292PRUC$34.41$36.13$37.93$39.83$41.82$2,752.50$2,890.13$3,034.63$3,186.36$3,345.68 FA NTWRK ADMINISTRATOR II 5294PRUC$37.85$39.74$41.73$43.81$46.00$3,027.75$3,179.14$3,338.10$3,505.00$3,680.25 FA PROGRAM ANALYST 5444PRUC$40.79$42.83$44.97$47.22$49.58$3,262.98$3,426.13$3,597.44$3,777.31$3,966.18 FA PROGRAM ASSISTANT 5451CONF$20.61$21.64$22.72$23.86$25.05$1,648.95$1,731.40$1,817.97$1,908.87$2,004.31 FA PROGRAM ASSISTANT SUPERVISOR5452PRUC$29.66$31.15$32.71$34.34$36.06$2,373.18$2,491.84$2,616.44$2,747.26$2,884.62 FA PROGRAM MANAGER 5445SM$45.99$48.29$50.70$53.24$55.90$3,679.08$3,863.04$4,056.18$4,258.99$4,471.95 FA PUB‐PRVT PART EXER PRG MGR5497MMUC$42.76$44.90$47.15$49.51$51.98$3,421.17$3,592.23$3,771.84$3,960.44$4,158.46 FA RCFL NETWRK ENGINEER 5284CONF$33.22$34.88$36.62$38.46$40.38$2,657.56$2,790.44$2,929.96$3,076.46$3,230.28 FA SR FINANCIAL ANALYST 5495PRUC$31.96$33.56$35.24$37.00$38.85$2,557.02$2,684.87$2,819.11$2,960.07$3,108.07 FA SR INTELLIGENCE ANALYST 5483PRUC$33.66$35.34$37.11$38.97$40.91$2,692.80$2,827.44$2,968.82$3,117.26$3,273.12 FA SR SECRETARY 5477CONF$21.20$22.26$23.38$24.55$25.77$1,696.30$1,781.11$1,870.17$1,963.67$2,061.86 FA SUPV INTELLIGENCE ANALYST 5481PRUC$37.03$38.88$40.82$42.86$45.01$2,962.08$3,110.18$3,265.69$3,428.98$3,600.43 FACILITIES MANAGER 6425MM$41.79$43.87$46.07$48.37$50.79$3,342.85$3,509.99$3,685.49$3,869.76$4,063.25 FACILITY & SUPPLY SPECIALIST 5648CVEA$21.17$22.23$23.35$24.51$25.74$1,693.98$1,778.68$1,867.61$1,960.99$2,059.04 FACILITY & SUPPLY SPEC (HRLY)5646UCHR$21.17$22.23$23.35$24.51$25.74$1,693.98$1,778.68$1,867.61$1,960.99$2,059.04 FIELD MAINTENANCE SPECIALIST 7471CVEA$19.25$20.21$21.22$22.28$23.40$1,539.99$1,616.99$1,697.84$1,782.73$1,871.86 FINANCE & PURCHASING MGR 3625SM$55.38 ‐‐‐$67.32$4,430.76 ‐‐‐$5,385.62 FIRE APPARATUS MECH6521CVEA$29.47$30.95$32.49$34.12$35.83$2,357.86$2,475.76$2,599.54$2,729.52$2,866.00 FIRE BATTALION CHIEF (112 HR)5511IAFF$35.24$37.00$38.85$40.79$42.83$3,946.63$4,143.96$4,351.16$4,568.72$4,797.15 FIRE BATTALION CHIEF (80 HR)5513IAFF$49.33$51.80$54.39$57.11$59.96$3,946.63$4,143.96$4,351.16$4,568.72$4,797.15 FIRE CAPTAIN (112 HR)5583IAFF$28.29$29.70$31.19$32.74$34.38$3,168.03$3,326.43$3,492.75$3,667.39$3,850.76 FIRE CAPTAIN (80 HR)5581IAFF$39.60$41.58$43.66$45.84$48.13$3,168.03$3,326.43$3,492.75$3,667.39$3,850.76 FIRE CAPTAIN (INTERIM)5580IAFF$28.29$29.70$31.19$32.74$34.38$3,168.03$3,326.43$3,492.75$3,667.39$3,850.76 FIRE CHIEF 5501EXEC$76.90 ‐$91.15 ‐$93.46$6,151.76 ‐$7,291.91 ‐$7,477.19 FIRE DIVISION CHIEF 5507MMUC$56.47$59.29$62.26$65.37$68.64$4,517.38$4,743.25$4,980.41$5,229.43$5,490.90 FIRE ENG (112 HR)5603IAFF$24.12$25.32$26.59$27.92$29.31$2,701.13$2,836.18$2,977.99$3,126.89$3,283.24 FIRE ENG (80 HR)5601IAFF$33.76$35.45$37.22$39.09$41.04$2,701.13$2,836.18$2,977.99$3,126.89$3,283.24 FIRE ENGINEER (INTERIM)5602IAFF$24.12$25.32$26.59$27.92$29.31$2,701.13$2,836.18$2,977.99$3,126.89$3,283.24 FIRE INSP/INVEST I 5530IAFF$28.56$29.98$31.48$33.06$34.71$2,284.42$2,398.64$2,518.57$2,644.50$2,776.73 FIRE INSP/INVEST I (HRLY)5534UCHR$28.56$29.98$31.48$33.06$34.71$2,284.42$2,398.64$2,518.57$2,644.50$2,776.73 Approved and Adopted: Resolution No.:2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 28 Fiscal Year 2016‐2017 Compensation Schedule Effective September 16, 2016 POSITION TITLEPCNBARGStep AStep BStep CStep DStep EStep AStep BStep CStep DStep E Hourly RateBiweekly Rate FIRE INSP/INVEST II5531IAFF$31.41$32.98$34.63$36.36$38.18$2,512.85$2,638.50$2,770.42$2,908.94$3,054.39 FIRE INSP/INVEST II HRLY5532UCHR$31.41$32.98$34.63$36.36$38.18$2,512.85$2,638.50$2,770.42$2,908.94$3,054.39 FIRE PREV ENG/INVEST5528IAFF$37.89$39.78$41.77$43.86$46.05$3,030.81$3,182.35$3,341.46$3,508.54$3,683.96 FIRE PREVENTION AIDE5535CVEA$13.97$14.67$15.40$16.17$16.98$1,117.51$1,173.39$1,232.06$1,293.66$1,358.34 FIRE PREVENTION AIDE (HRLY)5533UCHR$13.97$14.67$15.40$16.17$16.98$1,117.51$1,173.39$1,232.06$1,293.66$1,358.34 FIREFIGHTER (112 HR)5623IAFF$20.50$21.52$22.60$23.73$24.91$2,295.67$2,410.46$2,530.98$2,657.53$2,790.40 FIREFIGHTER (80 HR)5621IAFF$28.70$30.13$31.64$33.22$34.88$2,295.67$2,410.46$2,530.98$2,657.53$2,790.40 FIREFIGHTER/PARAMEDIC (112 HR)5613IAFF$23.57$24.75$25.99$27.29$28.65$2,640.02$2,772.02$2,910.62$3,056.15$3,208.96 FIREFIGHTER/PARAMEDIC (80 HR)5611IAFF$33.00$34.65$36.38$38.20$40.11$2,640.02$2,772.02$2,910.62$3,056.15$3,208.96 FISCAL & MANAGEMENT ANALYST0216PRCF$42.12$44.23$46.44$48.76$51.20$3,369.79$3,538.28$3,715.20$3,900.96$4,096.00 FISCAL OFFICE SPEC (HOURLY)0170UCHR$18.40$19.32$20.29$21.30$22.37$1,472.00$1,545.60$1,622.88$1,704.02$1,789.22 FISCAL OFFICE SPECIALIST 0169CVEA$18.40$19.32$20.29$21.30$22.37$1,472.00$1,545.60$1,622.88$1,704.02$1,789.22 FLEET INVENTORY CONTROL SPEC 6513CVEA$24.35$25.57$26.85$28.19$29.60$1,948.08$2,045.48$2,147.75$2,255.14$2,367.90 FLEET MANAGER 6501MM$40.75$42.79$44.93$47.18$49.54$3,260.39$3,423.41$3,594.58$3,774.31$3,963.03 FORENSICS SPECIALIST 5114CVEA$29.18$30.64$32.17$33.78$35.47$2,334.37$2,451.09$2,573.65$2,702.33$2,837.45 GARDENER (SEASONAL)6629UCHR$18.01$18.91$19.86$20.85$21.89$1,441.00$1,513.05$1,588.70$1,668.14$1,751.54 GARDENER I 6627CVEA$18.01$18.91$19.86$20.85$21.89$1,441.00$1,513.05$1,588.70$1,668.14$1,751.54 GARDENER II 6623CVEA$19.81$20.80$21.84$22.94$24.08$1,585.11$1,664.36$1,747.58$1,834.96$1,926.71 GIS MANAGER 3079MM$41.78$43.87$46.06$48.36$50.78$3,342.16$3,509.27$3,684.73$3,868.97$4,062.42 GIS SPECIALIST 3081CVEA$29.38$30.85$32.40$34.02$35.72$2,350.77$2,468.31$2,591.73$2,721.31$2,857.38 GIS SPECIALIST (HOURLY)3092UCHR$29.38$30.85$32.40$34.02$35.72$2,350.77$2,468.31$2,591.73$2,721.31$2,857.38 GRAFFITI ABATEMENT COORDINATOR6339CVEA$29.90$31.40$32.97$34.62$36.35$2,392.35$2,511.97$2,637.57$2,769.45$2,907.92 GRAPHIC DESIGNER 2775CVEA$26.03$27.33$28.70$30.13$31.64$2,082.47$2,186.59$2,295.92$2,410.72$2,531.25 GYMNASTIC SPECIALIST 7543UCHR$15.10$15.86$16.65$17.48$18.36$1,208.09$1,268.50$1,331.92$1,398.52$1,468.44 HOUSING MANAGER 4093SM$51.43 ‐‐‐$62.03$4,114.69 ‐‐‐$4,962.28 HR ANALYST 3310PRCF$32.51$34.14$35.85$37.64$39.52$2,601.11$2,731.16$2,867.72$3,011.11$3,161.66 HR OPERATIONS MANAGER 3317SM$52.97 ‐‐‐$64.38$4,237.61 ‐‐‐$5,150.65 HR TECHNICIAN 3315CONF$23.38$24.55$25.78$27.07$28.42$1,870.60$1,964.13$2,062.33$2,165.45$2,273.72 HVAC TECHNICIAN 6430CVEA$26.04$27.34$28.71$30.15$31.65$2,083.31$2,187.47$2,296.85$2,411.69$2,532.27 INFO TECH MANAGER 5104SM$50.91 ‐‐‐$61.10$4,072.98 ‐‐‐$4,887.77 INFO TECH SUPPORT SPECIALIST 3014PROF$34.19$35.90$37.69$39.58$41.56$2,735.03$2,871.78$3,015.37$3,166.14$3,324.45 INTERN, GRADUATE 0269UCHR$13.33$14.00$14.70$15.43$16.20$1,066.42$1,119.74$1,175.73$1,234.51$1,296.24 INTERN, UNDERGRADUATE 0267UCHR$12.12$12.72$13.36$14.03$14.73$969.47$1,017.95$1,068.84$1,122.29$1,178.40 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT 4480PROF$37.25$39.12$41.07$43.12$45.28$2,980.19$3,129.20$3,285.66$3,449.94$3,622.44 LANDSCAPE INSPECTOR 6291CVEA$28.42$29.84$31.33$32.90$34.55$2,273.73$2,387.41$2,506.79$2,632.12$2,763.73 LANDSCAPE PLANNER I 4482CVEA$29.35$30.82$32.36$33.98$35.68$2,348.03$2,465.43$2,588.70$2,718.13$2,854.04 LANDSCAPE PLANNER II 4483CVEA$32.29$33.90$35.59$37.37$39.24$2,582.83$2,711.97$2,847.57$2,989.95$3,139.45 LATENT PRINT EXAMINER 5111CVEA$33.56$35.23$37.00$38.85$40.79$2,684.53$2,818.76$2,959.69$3,107.68$3,263.06 LATENT PRINT EXAMINER HRLY 5112UCHR$33.56$35.23$37.00$38.85$40.79$2,684.53$2,818.76$2,959.69$3,107.68$3,263.06 LAW OFFICE MANAGER 2465MMUC$34.25$35.97$37.77$39.65$41.64$2,740.33$2,877.35$3,021.22$3,172.28$3,330.89 LEAD CUSTODIAN 6663CVEA$19.81$20.80$21.84$22.94$24.08$1,585.11$1,664.36$1,747.58$1,834.96$1,926.71 LEGAL ASSISTANT 0183CONF$24.86$26.10$27.40$28.77$30.21$1,988.55$2,087.98$2,192.38$2,301.99$2,417.09 LIBRARIAN I 7075CVEA$23.60$24.78$26.02$27.32$28.69$1,888.12$1,982.52$2,081.65$2,185.73$2,295.02 LIBRARIAN I (HOURLY)7076UCHR$23.60$24.78$26.02$27.32$28.69$1,888.12$1,982.52$2,081.65$2,185.73$2,295.02 LIBRARIAN II 7073CVEA$25.96$27.26$28.62$30.05$31.56$2,076.94$2,180.78$2,289.82$2,404.31$2,524.53 LIBRARIAN II (HOURLY)7074UCHR$25.96$27.26$28.62$30.05$31.56$2,076.94$2,180.78$2,289.82$2,404.31$2,524.53 LIBRARIAN III 7071CVEA$28.56$29.99$31.49$33.06$34.71$2,284.63$2,398.86$2,518.80$2,644.74$2,776.98 LIBRARY AIDE 7181UCHR$10.55$11.07$11.63$12.21$12.82$843.66$885.84$930.14$976.64$1,025.47 LIBRARY ASSISTANT 7157CVEA$16.98$17.83$18.72$19.65$20.63$1,358.09$1,426.00$1,497.29$1,572.16$1,650.77 LIBRARY ASSOCIATE 7091CVEA$21.46$22.53$23.66$24.84$26.08$1,716.48$1,802.30$1,892.42$1,987.04$2,086.39 LIBRARY ASSOCIATE (HOURLY)7092UCHR$21.46$22.53$23.66$24.84$26.08$1,716.47$1,802.29$1,892.41$1,987.03$2,086.38 LIBRARY DIGITAL SERVICES MGR 7025MM$40.50$42.52$44.65$46.88$49.23$3,239.88$3,401.88$3,571.97$3,750.57$3,938.10 LIBRARY OPERATIONS MANAGER 7029MM$46.59$48.92$51.37$53.94$56.64$3,727.54$3,913.92$4,109.61$4,315.10$4,530.85 LIBRARY TECHNICIAN 7121CVEA$19.52$20.50$21.52$22.60$23.73$1,561.81$1,639.90$1,721.90$1,807.99$1,898.39 LIBRARY TECHNICIAN (HOURLY)7122UCHR$19.52$20.50$21.52$22.60$23.73$1,561.81$1,639.90$1,721.90$1,807.99$1,898.39 LIBRARY VISITOR ASSISTANT 7185UCHR$13.25$13.92$14.61$15.34$16.11$1,060.32$1,113.34$1,169.01$1,227.46$1,288.83 LIFEGUARD I 7587UCHR$13.82$14.52$15.24$16.00$16.80$1,105.96$1,161.26$1,219.33$1,280.29$1,344.31 LIFEGUARD II 7585UCHR$15.21$15.97$16.77$17.60$18.48$1,216.59$1,277.42$1,341.29$1,408.36$1,478.77 LOCKSMITH 6443CVEA$24.80$26.04$27.34$28.71$30.15$1,984.09$2,083.30$2,187.46$2,296.84$2,411.68 MAINTENANCE WORKER I 6377CVEA$18.01$18.91$19.86$20.85$21.89$1,441.00$1,513.05$1,588.70$1,668.14$1,751.54 Approved and Adopted: Resolution No.:2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 29 Fiscal Year 2016‐2017 Compensation Schedule Effective September 16, 2016 POSITION TITLEPCNBARGStep AStep BStep CStep DStep EStep AStep BStep CStep DStep E Hourly RateBiweekly Rate MAINTENANCE WORKER I (HRLY)6379UCHR$18.01$18.91$19.86$20.85$21.89$1,441.00$1,513.05$1,588.70$1,668.14$1,751.54 MAINTENANCE WORKER II6373CVEA$19.81$20.80$21.84$22.94$24.08$1,585.11$1,664.36$1,747.58$1,834.96$1,926.71 MAINTENANCE WORKER II HRLY 6381UCHR$19.81$20.80$21.84$22.94$24.08$1,585.11$1,664.36$1,747.58$1,834.96$1,926.71 MANAGEMENT ANALYST 0225CVEA$30.44$31.96$33.56$35.24$37.00$2,435.25$2,557.01$2,684.86$2,819.11$2,960.06 MARKTNG & COMMUNICATIONS MGR2781SM$54.18 ‐$55.71 ‐$65.86$4,334.68 ‐$4,456.95 ‐$5,268.84 MAYOR 2001MY ‐‐‐‐$59.98 ‐‐‐‐$4,798.73 MECHANIC ASSISTANT 6550CVEA$19.79$20.78$21.82$22.91$24.06$1,583.31$1,662.48$1,745.60$1,832.88$1,924.53 MUSEUM ATTENDANT 7215UCHR$10.94$11.49$12.06$12.67$13.30$875.38$919.15$965.11$1,013.36$1,064.02 OFFICE SPECIALIST 0161CVEA$17.52$18.40$19.32$20.29$21.30$1,401.88$1,471.97$1,545.57$1,622.85$1,703.99 OFFICE SPECIALIST (HOURLY)0160UCHR$17.52$18.40$19.32$20.29$21.30$1,401.88$1,471.97$1,545.57$1,622.85$1,703.99 OFFICE SPECIALIST (MYR/@WILL)0162CVEA$17.52$18.40$19.32$20.29$21.30$1,401.88$1,471.97$1,545.57$1,622.85$1,703.99 OFFICE SPECIALIST (MYR/AW/HR)0156UCHR$17.52$18.40$19.32$20.29$21.30$1,401.88$1,471.97$1,545.57$1,622.85$1,703.99 OPEN SPACE INSPECTOR 6311CVEA$28.42$29.84$31.33$32.90$34.55$2,273.73$2,387.41$2,506.79$2,632.12$2,763.73 OPEN SPACE MANAGER 6302MM$39.50$41.48$43.55$45.73$48.02$3,160.31$3,318.32$3,484.24$3,658.45$3,841.37 OPS&TELECOM MGR 3025MM$41.78$43.87$46.06$48.36$50.78$3,342.15$3,509.26$3,684.72$3,868.96$4,062.41 PAINTER 6434CVEA$23.67$24.86$26.10$27.41$28.78$1,893.92$1,988.61$2,088.04$2,192.45$2,302.07 PARK RANGER 7434UCHR$13.25$13.91$14.61$15.34$16.10$1,059.90$1,112.89$1,168.53$1,226.96$1,288.31 PARK RANGER SUPERVISOR 7441CVEA$30.20$31.71$33.30$34.96$36.71$2,416.02$2,536.82$2,663.66$2,796.84$2,936.68 PARKING ENFORCEMENT OFFICER 5154CVEA$17.71$18.60$19.53$20.50$21.53$1,416.91$1,487.75$1,562.14$1,640.25$1,722.26 PARKING METER TECH (HOURLY)3694UCHR$19.48$20.46$21.48$22.55$23.68$1,558.60$1,636.53$1,718.36$1,804.27$1,894.49 PARKING METER TECHNICIAN 3693CVEA$19.48$20.46$21.48$22.55$23.68$1,558.60$1,636.53$1,718.36$1,804.27$1,894.49 PARKS MANAGER 6604MM$39.51$41.48$43.56$45.73$48.02$3,160.52$3,318.55$3,484.48$3,658.70$3,841.64 PARKS OPERATIONS MANAGER 6610MM$46.33$48.65$51.08$53.63$56.32$3,706.53$3,891.86$4,086.45$4,290.77$4,505.31 PARKS SUPERVISOR 6605CVEA$30.20$31.71$33.30$34.96$36.71$2,416.02$2,536.82$2,663.66$2,796.84$2,936.68 PEACE OFFICER 5061POA$34.30$36.02$37.82$39.71$41.69$2,744.04$2,881.24$3,025.30$3,176.57$3,335.39 PERFORMANCE & ORG DEV MGR 2758SM$51.69 ‐‐‐$62.03$4,135.26 ‐‐‐$4,962.28 PLAN CHECK SUPERVISOR 4731MM$45.63$47.91$50.30$52.82$55.46$3,650.11$3,832.62$4,024.25$4,225.46$4,436.73 PLAN CHECK TECHNICIAN 4753CVEA$27.19$28.55$29.97$31.47$33.04$2,174.87$2,283.61$2,397.79$2,517.68$2,643.56 PLANNING MANAGER 4727SM$53.84 ‐‐‐$64.96$4,307.47 ‐‐‐$5,196.46 PLANNING TECHNICIAN 4527CVEA$22.34$23.45$24.63$25.86$27.15$1,786.97$1,876.32$1,970.13$2,068.64$2,172.07 PLUMBER 6432CVEA$26.04$27.34$28.71$30.15$31.65$2,083.30$2,187.46$2,296.84$2,411.68$2,532.26 POLICE ADMIN SVCS ADMINISTRATO5025SM$52.66 ‐‐‐$64.01$4,212.83 ‐‐‐$5,120.54 POLICE AGENT 5051POA$37.77$39.66$41.64$43.72$45.91$3,021.63$3,172.71$3,331.35$3,497.91$3,672.81 POLICE CADET 5427UCHR$11.22$11.78$12.37$12.98$13.63$897.24$942.10$989.20$1,038.66$1,090.60 POLICE CAPTAIN 5022SM$69.81 ‐‐‐$84.85$5,584.99 ‐‐‐$6,788.31 POLICE COMM REL SPECIALIST 5258CVEA$22.87$24.01$25.21$26.48$27.80$1,829.62$1,921.10$2,017.16$2,118.02$2,223.92 POLICE COMM SYSTEMS MANAGER5185MM$41.78$43.87$46.06$48.37$50.79$3,342.54$3,509.66$3,685.15$3,869.40$4,062.87 POLICE DISPATCHER 5181CVEA$26.30$27.61$29.00$30.44$31.97$2,103.95$2,209.15$2,319.60$2,435.59$2,557.36 POLICE DISPATCHER (HOURLY)5180UCHR$26.30$27.61$29.00$30.44$31.97$2,103.95$2,209.15$2,319.60$2,435.59$2,557.36 POLICE DISPATCHER SUPERVISOR 5183CVEA$30.24$31.76$33.34$35.01$36.76$2,419.54$2,540.52$2,667.54$2,800.92$2,940.97 POLICE DISPATCHER TRAINEE5179CVEA$23.91$25.10$26.36$27.68$29.06$1,912.68$2,008.32$2,108.73$2,214.17$2,324.88 POLICE LIEUTENANT5031POA$52.14$54.75$57.49$60.36$63.38$4,171.25$4,379.81$4,598.80$4,828.74$5,070.18 POLICE REC & SUPPORT SUPV5203CVEA$23.18$24.33$25.55$26.83$28.17$1,854.02$1,946.72$2,044.05$2,146.25$2,253.57 POLICE RECORDS SPEC (HOURLY)0166UCHR$17.52$18.40$19.32$20.29$21.30$1,401.90$1,472.00$1,545.60$1,622.88$1,704.02 POLICE RECORDS SPECIALIST0165CVEA$17.52$18.40$19.32$20.29$21.30$1,401.90$1,472.00$1,545.60$1,622.88$1,704.02 POLICE RECRUIT5071CVEA$25.79$27.08 ‐‐‐$2,063.47$2,166.64 ‐‐‐ POLICE SERGEANT5041POA$43.45$45.62$47.90$50.30$52.81$3,475.78$3,649.57$3,832.04$4,023.65$4,224.83 POLICE SERVICES OFF (HOURLY)5133UCHR$23.57$24.75$25.99$27.29$28.65$1,885.90$1,980.20$2,079.21$2,183.17$2,292.33 POLICE SERVICES OFFICER5131CVEA$23.57$24.75$25.99$27.29$28.65$1,885.90$1,980.19$2,079.20$2,183.16$2,292.32 POLICE SERVICES TECHNICIAN5415CVEA$22.49$23.61$24.80$26.04$27.34$1,799.22$1,889.18$1,983.64$2,082.82$2,186.96 POLICE SUPPORT SERVICES MGR5205MM$40.44$42.46$44.59$46.81$49.16$3,235.23$3,396.99$3,566.84$3,745.18$3,932.44 POLICE SVCS OFFICER SUPERVISOR5132CVEA$27.11$28.47$29.89$31.38$32.95$2,168.77$2,277.21$2,391.07$2,510.63$2,636.16 POLICE TECH SPECIALIST (HRLY)5108UCHR$35.56$37.33$39.20$41.16$43.22$2,844.43$2,986.65$3,135.98$3,292.78$3,457.42 POLICE TECHNOLOGY SPECIALIST5107CVEA$35.56$37.33$39.20$41.16$43.22$2,844.43$2,986.65$3,135.98$3,292.78$3,457.42 POLICY AIDE2013PRUC$26.22$27.53$28.91$30.36$31.88$2,097.89$2,202.79$2,312.93$2,428.57$2,550.00 PRINCIPAL CIVIL ENGINEER 6021MM$50.08$52.59$55.22$57.98$60.88$4,006.69$4,207.02$4,417.37$4,638.24$4,870.15 PRINCIPAL ECONOMIC DEV SPEC 2724PROF$46.57$48.90$51.34$53.91$56.61$3,725.59$3,911.87$4,107.46$4,312.83$4,528.47 PRINCIPAL HR ANALYST 3305MMCF$43.19$45.35$47.61$49.99$52.49$3,454.94$3,627.69$3,809.07$3,999.53$4,199.50 PRINCIPAL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT4486MM$44.45$46.67$49.01$51.46$54.03$3,555.97$3,733.77$3,920.45$4,116.48$4,322.30 PRINCIPAL LIBRARIAN 7051MM$40.50$42.52$44.65$46.88$49.23$3,239.88$3,401.88$3,571.97$3,750.57$3,938.10 Approved and Adopted: Resolution No.:2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 30 Fiscal Year 2016‐2017 Compensation Schedule Effective September 16, 2016 POSITION TITLEPCNBARGStep AStep BStep CStep DStep EStep AStep BStep CStep DStep E Hourly RateBiweekly Rate PRINCIPAL MANAGEMENT ANALYST0208PROF$38.66$40.60$42.63$44.76$47.00$3,093.12$3,247.78$3,410.17$3,580.68$3,759.71 PRINCIPAL MGMT ANALYST (CONF)0214PRCF$38.66$40.60$42.63$44.76$47.00$3,093.12$3,247.78$3,410.17$3,580.68$3,759.71 PRINCIPAL PLANNER4431MM$46.57$48.90$51.34$53.91$56.61$3,725.59$3,911.87$4,107.46$4,312.83$4,528.47 PRINCIPAL PROJECT COORDINATOR4212PROF$46.57$48.90$51.34$53.91$56.61$3,725.59$3,911.87$4,107.46$4,312.83$4,528.47 PRINCIPAL RECREATION MANAGER7410MM$39.51$41.48$43.56$45.73$48.02$3,160.51$3,318.53$3,484.46$3,658.68$3,841.62 PROCUREMENT SPECIALIST3721CVEA$27.63$29.02$30.47$31.99$33.59$2,210.72$2,321.25$2,437.31$2,559.18$2,687.14 PROGRAMMER ANALYST3090PROF$33.85$35.54$37.32$39.18$41.14$2,707.68$2,843.07$2,985.22$3,134.48$3,291.20 PROJECT COORDINATOR I4217CVEA$29.35$30.82$32.36$33.98$35.68$2,348.03$2,465.43$2,588.70$2,718.13$2,854.04 PROJECT COORDINATOR I (HRLY)4218UCHR$29.35$30.82$32.36$33.98$35.68$2,348.03$2,465.43$2,588.70$2,718.13$2,854.04 PROJECT COORDINATOR II4215CVEA$32.29$33.90$35.59$37.37$39.24$2,582.83$2,711.97$2,847.57$2,989.95$3,139.45 PROJECT COORDINATOR II (HRLY)4216UCHR$32.29$33.90$35.59$37.37$39.24$2,582.83$2,711.97$2,847.57$2,989.95$3,139.45 PROPERTY & EVIDENCE SPECIALIST5127CVEA$19.48$20.46$21.48$22.55$23.68$1,558.60$1,636.53$1,718.36$1,804.27$1,894.49 PUB WORKS SPECIALIST6712CVEA$22.65$23.79$24.98$26.23$27.54$1,812.39$1,903.00$1,998.15$2,098.06$2,202.97 PUBLIC INFORMATION SPECIALIST2782CONF$27.82$29.21$30.67$32.20$33.81$2,225.44$2,336.72$2,453.55$2,576.23$2,705.04 PUBLIC SAFETY ANALYST5254CVEA$30.44$31.96$33.56$35.24$37.00$2,435.25$2,557.01$2,684.86$2,819.11$2,960.06 PUBLIC WORKS INSP I6123CVEA$28.42$29.84$31.33$32.90$34.55$2,273.73$2,387.41$2,506.79$2,632.12$2,763.73 PUBLIC WORKS INSP II6121CVEA$31.26$32.83$34.47$36.19$38.00$2,501.10$2,626.15$2,757.46$2,895.33$3,040.10 PUBLIC WORKS MANAGER6336MM$39.50$41.48$43.55$45.73$48.02$3,160.31$3,318.32$3,484.24$3,658.45$3,841.37 PUBLIC WORKS SUPERVISOR6337CVEA$30.20$31.71$33.30$34.96$36.71$2,416.02$2,536.82$2,663.66$2,796.84$2,936.68 PUMP MAINT TECHNICIAN6396CVEA$25.80$27.09$28.44$29.87$31.36$2,064.01$2,167.22$2,275.58$2,389.35$2,508.82 PUMP MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR6392CVEA$30.24$31.75$33.33$35.00$36.75$2,418.82$2,539.76$2,666.75$2,800.08$2,940.09 PURCHASING AGENT3711SM$47.32 ‐‐‐$57.51$3,785.24 ‐‐‐$4,600.97 RANGE MASTER5417CVEA$21.43$22.50$23.63$24.81$26.05$1,714.46$1,800.18$1,890.19$1,984.70$2,083.93 RANGE MASTER (HOURLY)5418UCHR$21.01$22.06$23.16$24.32$25.54$1,680.84$1,764.88$1,853.12$1,945.78$2,043.07 RCFL NETWORK ENGINEER5450UCHR$31.93$33.53$35.20$36.96$38.81$2,554.37$2,682.08$2,816.19$2,956.99$3,104.84 REAL PROPERTY MANAGER 6037MMUC$43.36$45.53$47.81$50.20$52.71$3,469.11$3,642.56$3,824.69$4,015.92$4,216.72 REC AIDE 7605UCHR$10.00$10.50$11.03$11.58$12.16$800.32$840.34$882.36$926.48$972.80 REC SPECIALIST 7601UCHR$15.80$16.59$17.42$18.30$19.21$1,264.33$1,327.55$1,393.92$1,463.62$1,536.80 REC SUPERVISOR I (HOURLY)7426UCHR$22.75$23.89$25.08$26.34$27.65$1,820.10$1,911.10$2,006.66$2,106.99$2,212.34 RECORDS MANAGER 2211MM$32.20$33.81$35.50$37.28$39.14$2,576.31$2,705.13$2,840.38$2,982.40$3,131.52 RECORDS SPECIALIST 2217CVEA$19.28$20.24$21.25$22.31$23.43$1,542.09$1,619.20$1,700.16$1,785.17$1,874.42 RECREATION LEADER I 7609UCHR$11.45$12.02$12.63$13.26$13.92$916.16$961.97$1,010.07$1,060.57$1,113.60 RECREATION LEADER II 7607UCHR$13.17$13.83$14.52$15.25$16.01$1,053.72$1,106.40$1,161.72$1,219.81$1,280.80 RECREATION SUPERVISOR I 7425CVEA$22.75$23.89$25.08$26.34$27.65$1,820.10$1,911.10$2,006.66$2,106.99$2,212.34 RECREATION SUPERVISOR II 7423CVEA$25.03$26.28$27.59$28.97$30.42$2,002.11$2,102.22$2,207.33$2,317.69$2,433.58 RECREATION SUPERVISOR III 7422CVEA$28.78$30.22$31.73$33.32$34.98$2,302.44$2,417.56$2,538.44$2,665.36$2,798.63 RECYCLING SPECIALIST I 2742CVEA$22.44$23.57$24.74$25.98$27.28$1,795.43$1,885.20$1,979.46$2,078.43$2,182.35 RECYCLING SPECIALIST II 2744CVEA$24.69$25.92$27.22$28.58$30.01$1,974.97$2,073.72$2,177.41$2,286.28$2,400.59 REDEVELOPMENT MANAGER 4045SM$48.68 ‐‐‐$59.17$3,894.07 ‐‐‐$4,733.27 REGISTERED VET TECH (HOURLY)5312UCHR$21.43$22.50$23.63$24.81$26.05$1,714.46$1,800.18$1,890.19$1,984.70$2,083.93 REGISTERED VETERINARY TECH 5307CVEA$21.43$22.50$23.63$24.81$26.05$1,714.46$1,800.18$1,890.19$1,984.70$2,083.93 RESERVE OFFICER 5081UCHR$14.24$14.95$15.69 ‐‐$1,139.42$1,195.85$1,255.53 ‐‐ RET ANNT ‐ HOMELESS OUTREACH9901UCHR$37.77$39.66$41.64$43.72$45.91$3,021.63$3,172.71$3,331.35$3,497.91$3,672.81 RISK MANAGEMENT SPECIALIST 3367PRCF$32.51$34.14$35.84$37.64$39.52$2,600.99$2,731.04$2,867.59$3,010.97$3,161.52 RISK MANAGER 3361SM$49.28 ‐‐‐$59.90$3,942.28 ‐‐‐$4,791.92 SCHOOL CROSSING GUARD 5143UCHR$10.05$10.55$11.08$11.64$12.22$804.19$844.39$886.62$930.94$977.49 SEASONAL ASSISTANT 0231UCHR$9.55$10.03$10.53$11.06$11.61$764.21$802.42$842.54$884.67$928.90 SECRETARY 0171CVEA$19.28$20.24$21.25$22.31$23.43$1,542.09$1,619.20$1,700.16$1,785.17$1,874.42 SECRETARY (HOURLY)0152UCHR$19.28$20.24$21.25$22.31$23.43$1,542.10$1,619.21$1,700.17$1,785.17$1,874.43 SIGNAL SYSTEMS ENGINEER I 6169CVEA$32.67$34.31$36.02$37.83$39.72$2,613.99$2,744.69$2,881.92$3,026.02$3,177.32 SIGNAL SYSTEMS ENGINEER II 6170CVEA$35.94$37.74$39.63$41.61$43.69$2,875.39$3,019.16$3,170.11$3,328.62$3,495.05 SIGNING&STRIPING SUPERVISOR 6355CVEA$30.20$31.71$33.30$34.96$36.71$2,416.02$2,536.82$2,663.66$2,796.84$2,936.68 SPECIAL EVENTS COORDINATOR 2799PRUC$37.16$39.02$40.97$43.02$45.17$2,972.66$3,121.29$3,277.36$3,441.23$3,613.29 SR ACCOUNTANT 3630MMCF$39.61$41.59$43.67$45.85$48.14$3,168.48$3,326.90$3,493.25$3,667.91$3,851.31 SR ACCOUNTING ASST 3651CVEA$22.90$24.05$25.25$26.52$27.84$1,832.37$1,923.99$2,020.19$2,121.20$2,227.26 SR ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY 0145CONF$27.07$28.43$29.85$31.34$32.91$2,165.96$2,274.25$2,387.97$2,507.36$2,632.73 SR ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY 0185CVEA$27.07$28.43$29.85$31.34$32.91$2,165.96$2,274.25$2,387.97$2,507.36$2,632.73 SR ANIMAL CARE SPECIALIST 5345CVEA$20.54$21.56$22.64$23.77$24.96$1,643.01$1,725.16$1,811.42$1,901.99$1,997.09 SR APPL SUPPORT SPEC (HRLY)3099UCHR$37.61$39.49$41.46$43.53$45.71$3,008.54$3,158.96$3,316.91$3,482.76$3,656.89 SR APPLICATIONS SUPPORT SPEC 3089PROF$37.61$39.49$41.46$43.53$45.71$3,008.54$3,158.96$3,316.91$3,482.76$3,656.89 Approved and Adopted: Resolution No.:2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 31 Fiscal Year 2016‐2017 Compensation Schedule Effective September 16, 2016 POSITION TITLEPCNBARGStep AStep BStep CStep DStep EStep AStep BStep CStep DStep E Hourly RateBiweekly Rate SR ASST CITY ATTORNEY2403EXEC$74.32 ‐‐‐$90.34$5,945.98 ‐‐‐$7,227.37 SR BUILDING INSPECTOR4781CVEA$35.95$37.75$39.64$41.62$43.70$2,876.25$3,020.06$3,171.07$3,329.62$3,496.10 SR BUSINESS LICENSE REP4507CVEA$22.90$24.05$25.25$26.52$27.84$1,832.37$1,923.99$2,020.19$2,121.20$2,227.26 SR CIVIL ENGINEER6019WCE$45.10$47.35$49.72$52.21$54.82$3,607.87$3,788.26$3,977.68$4,176.56$4,385.39 SR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFF4763CVEA$34.35$36.07$37.87$39.77$41.76$2,748.17$2,885.58$3,029.86$3,181.35$3,340.42 SR CONSERVATION SPECIALIST 6204CVEA$28.39$29.81$31.30$32.87$34.51$2,271.23$2,384.79$2,504.03$2,629.23$2,760.69 SR COUNCIL ASST 2027CONF$21.13$22.19$23.30$24.47$25.69$1,690.72$1,775.25$1,864.01$1,957.21$2,055.08 SR COUNCIL ASST 2025UCHR$25.45$26.73$28.06$29.47$30.94$2,036.31$2,138.13$2,245.03$2,357.28$2,475.15 SR DEPUTY CITY CLERK 2208PRUC$32.18$33.78$35.47$37.25$39.11$2,574.07$2,702.77$2,837.91$2,979.81$3,128.80 SR ECONOMIC DEV SPEC 2725PROF$37.25$39.12$41.07$43.12$45.28$2,980.19$3,129.20$3,285.66$3,449.94$3,622.44 SR ELECTRICIAN 6442CVEA$29.95$31.44$33.02$34.67$36.40$2,395.80$2,515.59$2,641.37$2,773.44$2,912.11 SR ELECTRONICS TECHNICIAN 6471CVEA$32.94$34.59$36.32$38.14$40.04$2,635.44$2,767.21$2,905.57$3,050.85$3,203.39 SR ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN 6059CVEA$31.26$32.83$34.47$36.19$38.00$2,501.10$2,626.15$2,757.46$2,895.33$3,040.10 SR EQUIPMENT MECHANIC 6512CVEA$28.26$29.67$31.16$32.71$34.35$2,260.80$2,373.84$2,492.53$2,617.15$2,748.01 SR FIRE INSP/INVEST 5529IAFF$36.49$38.31$40.23$42.24$44.35$2,918.98$3,064.93$3,218.18$3,379.09$3,548.04 SR FISCAL OFF SPEC (HRLY)0176UCHR$20.24$21.25$22.31$23.43$24.60$1,619.19$1,700.15$1,785.16$1,874.42$1,968.14 SR FISCAL OFFICE SPECIALIST 0141CONF$20.24$21.25$22.31$23.43$24.60$1,619.19$1,700.15$1,785.16$1,874.42$1,968.14 SR FISCAL OFFICE SPECIALIST 0175CVEA$20.24$21.25$22.31$23.43$24.60$1,619.19$1,700.15$1,785.16$1,874.42$1,968.14 SR GARDENER 6621CVEA$23.78$24.97$26.21$27.52$28.90$1,902.13$1,997.24$2,097.10$2,201.96$2,312.05 SR GIS SPECIALIST 3080CVEA$32.32$33.94$35.64$37.42$39.29$2,585.85$2,715.15$2,850.90$2,993.45$3,143.12 SR GRAPHIC DESIGNER 2764PROF$33.67$35.35$37.12$38.98$40.92$2,693.51$2,828.18$2,969.59$3,118.07$3,273.98 SR HR ANALYST 3308PRCF$37.39$39.26$41.22$43.28$45.45$2,991.27$3,140.84$3,297.88$3,462.77$3,635.91 SR HUMAN RESOURCES TECHNICIAN3316CONF$26.89$28.24$29.65$31.13$32.69$2,151.42$2,258.99$2,371.94$2,490.54$2,615.07 SR HVAC TECHNICIAN 6441CVEA$29.95$31.44$33.02$34.67$36.40$2,395.80$2,515.59$2,641.37$2,773.44$2,912.11 SR INFO TECH SUPPORT SPEC 3012PROF$37.61$39.49$41.46$43.53$45.71$3,008.54$3,158.96$3,316.91$3,482.76$3,656.89 SR LAND SURVEYOR 6285WCE$45.10$47.35$49.72$52.21$54.82$3,607.87$3,788.26$3,977.68$4,176.56$4,385.39 SR LANDSCAPE INSPECTOR 6295CVEA$32.68$34.32$36.03$37.84$39.73$2,614.78$2,745.52$2,882.79$3,026.93$3,178.28 SR LATENT PRINT EXAMINER 5110CVEA$38.59$40.52$42.55$44.67$46.91$3,087.21$3,241.57$3,403.65$3,573.83$3,752.52 SR LEGAL ASSISTANT 2463CONF$27.34$28.71$30.15$31.65$33.24$2,187.40$2,296.77$2,411.61$2,532.19$2,658.80 SR LIBRARIAN 7053MM$31.58$33.16$34.82$36.56$38.38$2,526.28$2,652.59$2,785.22$2,924.49$3,070.71 SR LIFEGUARD 7589UCHR$16.72$17.55$18.43$19.35$20.32$1,337.40$1,404.27$1,474.48$1,548.21$1,625.62 SR MAINTENANCE WORKER 6371CVEA$23.78$24.97$26.21$27.52$28.90$1,902.13$1,997.24$2,097.10$2,201.96$2,312.05 SR MANAGEMENT ANALYST 0206PROF$35.15$36.91$38.75$40.69$42.72$2,811.91$2,952.51$3,100.13$3,255.14$3,417.90 SR OFFICE SPECIALIST 0173CVEA$19.28$20.24$21.25$22.31$23.43$1,542.09$1,619.20$1,700.16$1,785.17$1,874.42 SR OFFICE SPECIALIST (HOURLY)0174UCHR$19.28$20.24$21.25$22.31$23.43$1,542.10$1,619.21$1,700.17$1,785.17$1,874.43 SR OPEN SPACE INSPECTOR 6309CVEA$32.68$34.32$36.04$37.84$39.73$2,614.79$2,745.53$2,882.80$3,026.94$3,178.29 SR PARK RANGER 7439CVEA$23.78$24.97$26.21$27.52$28.90$1,902.13$1,997.24$2,097.10$2,201.96$2,312.05 SR PLAN CHECK ENGINEER 4746WCE$43.14$45.29$47.56$49.94$52.43$3,451.01$3,623.57$3,804.74$3,994.98$4,194.73 SR PLAN CHECK TECHNICIAN 4751CVEA$31.26$32.83$34.47$36.19$38.00$2,501.10$2,626.15$2,757.46$2,895.33$3,040.10 SR PLANNER 4432PROF$37.25$39.12$41.07$43.12$45.28$2,980.19$3,129.20$3,285.66$3,449.94$3,622.44 SR PLANNING TECHNICIAN 4529CVEA$25.69$26.97$28.32$29.74$31.22$2,055.01$2,157.76$2,265.65$2,378.93$2,497.88 SR POLICE RECORDS SPECIALIST 0135CVEA$20.15$21.16$22.22$23.33$24.50$1,612.20$1,692.81$1,777.45$1,866.32$1,959.63 SR POLICE TECHNOLOGY SPEC 5109PROF$40.89$42.93$45.08$47.33$49.70$3,271.10$3,434.65$3,606.39$3,786.71$3,976.04 SR PROCUREMENT SPECIALIST 3728PROF$30.56$32.08$33.69$35.37$37.14$2,444.55$2,566.77$2,695.11$2,829.87$2,971.36 SR PROGRAMMER ANALYST 3091PROF$38.70$40.64$42.67$44.80$47.04$3,096.11$3,250.92$3,413.46$3,584.13$3,763.34 SR PROJECT COORDINATOR 4214PROF$37.25$39.12$41.07$43.12$45.28$2,980.19$3,129.20$3,285.66$3,449.94$3,622.44 SR PROP & EVIDENCE SPECIALIST 5125CVEA$22.40$23.53$24.70$25.94$27.23$1,792.39$1,882.01$1,976.11$2,074.91$2,178.66 SR PUBLIC SAFETY ANALYST 5260PROF$33.66$35.34$37.11$38.97$40.91$2,692.83$2,827.47$2,968.84$3,117.29$3,273.15 SR PUBLIC WORKS INSP 6101CVEA$35.95$37.75$39.64$41.62$43.70$2,876.26$3,020.07$3,171.08$3,329.63$3,496.11 SR PUBLIC WORKS SPECIALIST 6702CVEA$27.19$28.55$29.97$31.47$33.04$2,174.86$2,283.60$2,397.78$2,517.67$2,643.55 SR RECORDS SPECIALIST 2215CVEA$22.17$23.28$24.44$25.66$26.94$1,773.41$1,862.08$1,955.18$2,052.94$2,155.59 SR RECREATION MGR 7421MM$32.46$34.08$35.78$37.57$39.45$2,596.59$2,726.41$2,862.74$3,005.87$3,156.17 SR RECYCLING SPECIALIST2746CVEA$28.39$29.81$31.30$32.87$34.51$2,271.23$2,384.79$2,504.03$2,629.23$2,760.69 SR RISK MANAGEMENT SPECIALIST3365PRCF$37.39$39.26$41.22$43.28$45.45$2,991.27$3,140.84$3,297.88$3,462.77$3,635.91 SR SECRETARY0139CONF$21.20$22.26$23.38$24.55$25.77$1,696.30$1,781.12$1,870.18$1,963.68$2,061.87 SR SECRETARY0177CVEA$21.20$22.26$23.38$24.55$25.77$1,696.30$1,781.12$1,870.18$1,963.68$2,061.87 SR SECRETARY (HOURLY)0178UCHR$21.20$22.26$23.38$24.55$25.77$1,696.30$1,781.11$1,870.17$1,963.67$2,061.86 SR TREE TRIMMER6573CVEA$26.15$27.46$28.84$30.28$31.79$2,092.34$2,196.95$2,306.80$2,422.14$2,543.25 SR WEBMASTER2779PROF$33.79$35.48$37.26$39.12$41.07$2,703.38$2,838.55$2,980.48$3,129.51$3,285.98 STOREKEEPER3734CVEA$19.81$20.80$21.84$22.94$24.08$1,585.11$1,664.36$1,747.58$1,834.96$1,926.71 Approved and Adopted: Resolution No.:2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 32 Fiscal Year 2016‐2017 Compensation Schedule Effective September 16, 2016 POSITION TITLEPCNBARGStep AStep BStep CStep DStep EStep AStep BStep CStep DStep E Hourly RateBiweekly Rate STOREKEEPER SUPERVISOR3732CVEA$23.78$24.97$26.21$27.52$28.90$1,902.13$1,997.24$2,097.10$2,201.96$2,312.05 STORMWTR COMPLNCE INSP I6127CVEA$25.84$27.13$28.49$29.91$31.41$2,067.02$2,170.37$2,278.89$2,392.83$2,512.47 STORMWTR COMPLNCE INSP II6125CVEA$28.42$29.84$31.33$32.90$34.55$2,273.73$2,387.41$2,506.79$2,632.12$2,763.73 SURVEY TECHNICIAN I6151CVEA$24.71$25.95$27.25$28.61$30.04$1,977.15$2,076.00$2,179.80$2,288.79$2,403.23 SURVEY TECHNICIAN II6141CVEA$27.19$28.55$29.97$31.47$33.04$2,174.86$2,283.60$2,397.78$2,517.67$2,643.55 SYSTEMS/DATABASE ADMINISTRATR3015PROF$37.60$39.48$41.46$43.53$45.71$3,008.28$3,158.70$3,316.63$3,482.46$3,656.59 TELECOMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST3027CVEA$22.87$24.02$25.22$26.48$27.80$1,829.79$1,921.28$2,017.34$2,118.21$2,224.12 TINY TOT AIDE7503UCHR$13.17$13.83$14.52$15.25$16.01$1,053.72$1,106.40$1,161.72$1,219.81$1,280.80 TINY TOT SPECIALIST7505UCHR$15.80$16.59$17.42$18.30$19.21$1,264.33$1,327.55$1,393.92$1,463.62$1,536.80 TRAFFIC CONTROL ASSISTANT5155UCHR ‐‐‐‐$15.69 ‐‐‐‐$1,255.20 TRAFFIC DEVICES TECH6177CVEA$28.65$30.08$31.58$33.16$34.82$2,291.69$2,406.27$2,526.58$2,652.91$2,785.56 TRAFFIC DEVICES TECH SUPV6175CVEA$32.94$34.59$36.32$38.14$40.04$2,635.44$2,767.21$2,905.57$3,050.85$3,203.39 TRAFFIC ENGINEER6024PROF$38.88$40.82$42.86$45.01$47.26$3,110.23$3,265.74$3,429.03$3,600.48$3,780.51 TRAFFIC OFFICER (HOURLY)5293UCHR$14.24$14.95$15.69 ‐‐$1,139.42$1,195.84$1,255.53 ‐‐ TRAINING PROGRAM SPEC (HRLY)5250UCHR$22.87$24.01$25.21$26.48$27.80$1,829.62$1,921.10$2,017.16$2,118.02$2,223.92 TRAINING PROGRAMS SPECIALIST 5262CVEA$22.87$24.01$25.21$26.48$27.80$1,829.62$1,921.10$2,017.16$2,118.02$2,223.92 TRANS ENGINEER W/ CERT 6031WCE$45.10$47.35$49.72$52.21$54.82$3,607.87$3,788.26$3,977.68$4,176.56$4,385.39 TRANS ENGINEER W/O CERT 6033WCE$42.95$45.10$47.35$49.72$52.21$3,436.07$3,607.87$3,788.27$3,977.68$4,176.56 TRANSIT MANAGER 6218MMUC$46.60$48.93$51.38$53.95$56.65$3,728.26$3,914.68$4,110.41$4,315.93$4,531.73 TREE TRIMMER 6575CVEA$21.80$22.89$24.03$25.23$26.49$1,743.62$1,830.80$1,922.34$2,018.45$2,119.38 TREE TRIMMER SUPERVISOR 6572CVEA$30.08$31.58$33.16$34.82$36.56$2,406.20$2,526.51$2,652.83$2,785.47$2,924.75 VETERINARIAN 5321PROF$38.17$40.08$42.08$44.18$46.39$3,053.45$3,206.12$3,366.43$3,534.75$3,711.48 VETERINARIAN (HOURLY)5308UCHR$46.77$49.11$51.57$54.15$56.85$3,741.96$3,929.06$4,125.51$4,331.78$4,548.37 VETERINARIAN (PERMITTED)5331PROF$53.74$56.43$59.25$62.21$65.32$4,299.25$4,514.21$4,739.92$4,976.92$5,225.77 VETERINARIAN‐PERMITTED 5322UCHR$66.13$69.44$72.91$76.56$80.39$5,290.73$5,555.27$5,833.03$6,124.68$6,430.92 VETERINARY ASSISTANT 5325CVEA$17.86$18.75$19.69$20.67$21.71$1,428.71$1,500.15$1,575.16$1,653.92$1,736.61 VETERINARY ASSISTANT (HOURLY)5323UCHR$17.86$18.75$19.69$20.67$21.71$1,428.72$1,500.16$1,575.17$1,653.93$1,736.62 VOLUNTEER COORD (DEPT)7131CVEA$19.52$20.50$21.52$22.60$23.73$1,561.81$1,639.90$1,721.90$1,807.99$1,898.39 VOLUNTEER COORD (DEPT)(HOURLY)7132UCHR$19.52$20.50$21.52$22.60$23.73$1,561.81$1,639.90$1,721.90$1,807.99$1,898.39 WASTEWATER/STRMWTR OPS MANAGER6332MM$45.43$47.70$50.09$52.59$55.22$3,634.35$3,816.07$4,006.87$4,207.22$4,417.58 WEBMASTER 2777CVEA$29.38$30.85$32.40$34.02$35.72$2,350.77$2,468.31$2,591.73$2,721.31$2,857.38 WEBMASTER (HOURLY)2790UCHR$29.38$30.85$32.40$34.02$35.72$2,350.77$2,468.31$2,591.73$2,721.31$2,857.38 Revised: June 21, 2016 (Effective June 24, 2016) June 21, 2016 (Effective July 8, 2016) August 2, 2016 (Effective August 5, 2016) September 13, 2016 (Effective September 16, 2016) Approved and Adopted: Resolution No.:2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 33 City of Chula Vista Staff Report File#:16-0450, Item#: 3. ORDINANCEOFTHECITYOFCHULAVISTAACTINGASTHELEGISLATIVEBODYOF COMMUNITYFACILITIESDISTRICTNO.16-I(MILLENIA),AUTHORIZINGTHELEVYOFA SPECIALTAXINIMPROVEMENTAREANO.1ANDIMPROVEMENTAREANO.2OFSUCH COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT (SECOND READING) RECOMMENDED ACTION Council adopt the ordinance. SUMMARY OnAugust2,2016,CouncilapprovedtheResolutionofIntentiontoformCommunityFacilities DistrictNo.16-IandtheResolutionofIntentiontoIncuraBondedIndebtednessofCFDNo.16-Iand set the public hearing for September 13, 2016. CommunityFacilitiesDistrictNo.16-I(“CFDNo.16-I”or“District”)willfundtheacquisitionor constructionofcertainpublicfacilitiesservingpropertywithintheMilleniamasterplanned community.Tonight’sactionwillcontinuetheformalproceedingsleadingtotheestablishmentof CommunityFacilitiesDistrictNo.16-Iandtheauthorization,subjecttotheapprovalofthequalified electors,tolevyspecialtaxeswithineachimprovementareaandincurbondedindebtednessfor eachimprovementareasecuredbythelevyofsuchspecialtaxes.Inaddition,Councilwillconsider approvingtheformoftheAcquisition/FinanceAgreement(the"Agreement")withSLFIV-Millenia, LLCthatestablishestheprocedureforacquiringtheimprovementstobeconstructedbythe developer. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Environmental Notice Theactivityisnota“Project”asdefinedunderSection15378oftheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQuality ActStateGuidelines;therefore,pursuanttoStateGuidelinesSection15060(c)(3)noenvironmental review is required. Environmental Determination TheDirectorofDevelopmentServiceshasreviewedtheproposedactivityforcompliancewiththe CaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct(CEQA)andhasdeterminedthattheactivityisnota“Project”as definedunderSection15378oftheStateCEQAGuidelinesbecausetheproposedactivityconsistsof thecreationofagovernmentalfiscal/fundingmechanismwhichdoesnotresultinaphysicalchange intheenvironment;therefore,pursuanttoSection15060(c)(3)oftheStateCEQAGuidelines,the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is required. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 1 of 9 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 34 File#:16-0450, Item#: 3. Not Applicable RECOMMENDATION That Council: ·Open the Hearing, take public testimony, close the public hearing; ·ApprovetheResolution(A)ResolutionFormingandEstablishingCommunityFacilities DistrictNo.16-I(Millenia),DesignatingtwoImprovementAreasthereinandauthorizing submittaloflevyofSpecialTaxeswithineachImprovementAreaofsuchCommunity Facilities District to the Qualified Electors of each Improvement Area ·ApprovetheResolution(B)ResolutionDeclaringNecessitytoIncuraBonded IndebtednessforImprovementAreaNo.1andImprovementAreaNo.2ofCommunity FacilitiesDistrictNo.16-I(Millenia),submittingtotheQualifiedElectorsofeachsuch ImprovementAreaseparatePropositionstoauthorizethelevyofaSpecialTaxtherein, toauthorizesuchCommunityFacilitiesDistricttoincurabondedindebtednessforeach suchImprovementAreasecuredbythelevyofsuchSpecialTaxthereintofinance certaintypesofpublicfacilitiesandtoestablishanappropriationslimitforsuch Community Facilities District, and giving notice thereon ·ApprovetheResolution(C)ResolutionoftheCityCounciloftheCityofChulaVista,California, actinginitscapacityasthelegislativebodyofCommunityFacilitiesDistrictNo.16-I(Millenia) declaring the results of a special election in such Community Facilities District ·IntroducetheOrdinance(D)OrdinanceoftheCityCounciloftheCityofChulaVista, California,actingasthelegislativebodyofCommunityFacilitiesDistrictNo.16-I(Millenia), authorizingthelevyofaSpecialTaxinImprovementAreaNo.1andImprovementAreaNo.2 of such Community Facilities District DISCUSSION SLFIV-Millenia,LLC,isthemasterdeveloper(“MasterDeveloper”)ofthepropertylocatedwithin theproposeddevelopmentcommonlyknownasMillenia,amixed-use,pedestrianoriented,urban masterplannedcommunity.MilleniawasformerlyreferredtoastheEasternUrbanCenterandis includedintheEasternUrbanCenterSectionalPlanningArea.FinalMapshavebeenrecordedfor themajorityofMillenia,whichconsistsofapproximatelytwo-hundredandsix(206.6)acreslocated southofBirchRoadParkway,westofEastlakeParkway,andeastofStateRoute125(SR-125). Milleniaisproposedtocontain2,983multi-familyunits,approximately40.5acresofcommercial (officeandretail)development,abusinessclasshotel(2.2acres),apublicschool(6.84acres)and six neighborhood parks (12.88 acres). TheCityandMcMillinOtayRanch,LLC(“McMillin”)enteredintoadevelopmentagreement (“DevelopmentAgreement”)inOctober2009pertainingtothedevelopmentofMillenia.TheMaster DeveloperistheassigneetoMcMillinundertheDevelopmentAgreement.TheDevelopment AgreementprovidesforcertaintermsandconditionsunderwhichCityandMasterDeveloper,as assigneetoMcMillin,willcooperatetoestablishaCommunityFacilitiesDistrict(CFD)tofinancethe City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 2 of 9 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 35 File#:16-0450, Item#: 3. assigneetoMcMillin,willcooperatetoestablishaCommunityFacilitiesDistrict(CFD)tofinancethe acquisitionandconstructionofeligiblepublicfacilitiesinconnectionwithdevelopmentoftheMillenia project.CFDsprovidethenecessaryfundingfortheacquisitionorconstructionofpublic improvementsbylevyinganannual“specialtax”,whichiscollectedfromthepropertyownersin conjunctionwiththepropertytaxesandbyissuingbondssecuredbythelevyofsuchspecialtaxes, with no direct cost to the City. AspermittedundertheDevelopmentAgreement,certainportionsofMilleniasuchasrentaland affordableprojectshaveintentionallybeenexcludedfromtheproposedDistrictboundaries.The MasterDevelopercurrentlyownsallofthepropertywithintheproposedDistrictwiththeexceptionof approximately10acressoldtoSheaHomesforafor-saleresidentialprojectandapproximately7 acressoldtoChesnutPropertiesforanofficedevelopment.Staffbelievesthatadequateinformation hasbeenreviewedandanalysishasbeenconductedtoevaluatetheMasterDeveloper’sfinancial abilitytobringtheMilleniaprojecttocompletionincompliancewithCitycriteria.Therefore,staffis recommendingthatCounciladopttheresolutionsbeforeCounciltonightandintroducetheOrdinance inordertoestablishtheDistrict.TheCityhasretainedtheservicesofWilldanFinancialServicesas specialtaxconsultantandBestBestandKriegerLLPaslegalcounseltoprovideassistanceduring the proceedings. AllexpensesincurredbytheCityinundertakingtheproceedingstoconsidertheformationofCFD No.16-Iandsubsequentlyauthorizing,issuingandsellingbondsoftheDistricttofinancethe acquisitionorconstructionoftheeligiblepublicfacilities(exceptthosecostsandexpenseswhichare contingentupontheissuanceofbondsfortheDistrictandarepayablesolelyfromtheproceedsof suchbonds)willbepaidforbyadvancesmadebytheMasterDeveloperpursuanttotheAdvance DepositandReimbursementAgreementpreviouslyenteredintobetweentheCityandMaster Developer.AllongoingexpensesrelatedtotheDistrictadministration(includinglevyingand collectingthespecialtaxes)aretobefundedfromannualspecialtaxescollectedbytheDistrict. Additionally,intheeventasecondseriesofbondsareissuedforanimprovementarea,theMaster Developerisrequiredtodepositadditionalfundsatthetimeofbondissuance,pursuanttothe Development Agreement, in order to establish a reserve account for administrative expenses. TheultimatesecurityforthebondsarethepropertieslocatedwithintheDistrict,nottheCity’s GeneralFundoritsabilitytotaxpropertywithinitsjurisdictionoutsideoftheDistrict.ThisDistrictwill beformedinconformancewiththe“CityofChulaVistaStatementofGoalsandPoliciesRegarding theEstablishmentofCommunityFacilitiesDistricts”(“CFDPolicy”)andthetermsandconditionsof the“FinancingPlan”containedwithintheDevelopmentAgreementwhichprovidesforcertain exceptions to the CFD Policy. TheFinalEnvironmentalImpactReport(SCH#2007041074)pertainingtotheentireMilleniaproject wascertifiedbytheCityCouncilonSeptember15,2009.TheTentativeMapfortheentireMillenia projectwasapprovedbyCityCouncilonSeptember15,2009and,todate,allFinalMapsfor property within the proposed District have been recorded. District Boundaries TheDistrictboundarymapwaspreviouslyapprovedbyCouncilonAugust2,2016andfiledwiththe SanDiegoCountyRecorder’sOfficeonAugust11,2016.Arecordedcopyofthemapispresentedin Attachment 1. City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 3 of 9 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 36 File#:16-0450, Item#: 3. TheMasterDeveloperownsapproximately74%ofthe67acresoftaxablepropertywithinthe proposedDistrict,withtheremainderbeingownedbySheaHomesandChesnutProperties.At buildout,theportionofMilleniawithintheDistrictisproposedtocontainatotalofapproximately865 multi-family residential units and approximately 26.3 acres of commercial development, as follows: ·ImprovementAreaNo.1:approximately24acresplannedfor416 condominium/townhomeunitsandapproximately18acresplannedforcommercial development. ·ImprovementAreaNo.2:approximately16.5acresplannedfor449 condominium/townhomeunitsandapproximately8.3acresplannedforcommercial development. The Improvements Thespecialtaxconsultanthasreviewedandconfirmedapreliminarytaxspreadandbondsizing analysispreparedbytheMasterDeveloperthatisbasedonestimatedhousesizesandprices.This taxspreadsetstheamountofmaximumspecialtaxthatmaybeleviedbytheDistrictwithineach improvementareaofCFDNo.16-I.Theproposedtaxesarediscussedbelowinthesection “ProposedSpecialTaxes”.Additionalcalculationsshowthatthemaximumspecialtaxrevenue(using theproposedtaxes)fromallthepropertieswouldsupportatotalbondedindebtednessof approximately$12.5millionforImprovementAreaNo.1and$13.2millionforImprovementAreaNo. 2(assuminga5.0%interestrateanda30-yearbondterm).Theaggregatebondissuancesofboth improvementareastotalingapproximately$25.7millionwillfinanceapproximately$20.7millionin facilities(i.e.grading,landscaping,streets,utilities,drainage,sewer,parks,pedestrianbridge,etc). Thebalancewouldprovideforareservefund,capitalizedinterest,initialadministrationexpenses, district formation and bond issuance costs. TheMasterDeveloperhasrequestedthattheDistrictbeauthorizedtofinancebackboneandinternal streetsandassociatedimprovements(i.e.grading,sewer,streets,busrapidtransitguideways, landscaping,utilities,etc.)includingeligibleTransportationDevelopmentImpactFee(TDIF)facilities, publicparks,stormdrainfacilities,sewerfacilities,pedestrianbridgefacilities,alibrary,afirestation, andotherpublicfacilities.TheCFDReport(Attachment2)showsapreliminarylistoffacilitieswith atotalcostestimateofapproximately$94.4million.Asnotedabove,itisestimatedthatonly$25.7 millioninbondsmaybesupportedbythisDistrict,generatingapproximately$20.7millionofproject proceeds.AmoredetailedlistandcostestimateoftheimprovementseligibleforDistrictfinancingis contained in the Acquisition/Financing Agreement (Attachment 3). Ultimately,assubdivisionexactions,theMasterDeveloperwillfinanceimprovementsthatthisDistrict cannotfinance.TheactualamounttobefinancedbytheDistrictwilldependonanumberoffactors includingthefinalinterestrateonthebonds,value-to-lienratioandrevisionstothecostestimates (higherorlower)fortheestimated$20.7millionofprojectproceeds.Aspreviouslystated,thebond interestrateassumptionforpurposesoftheestimatedbondamountsandprojectproceedsusedin thisreportis5%;however,ifinterestratesareultimatelylower,theactualbondamountandproject proceedswillbehigher.Forexample,ata3%bondinterestratethebondamountisestimatedat $20,800,000forImprovementAreaNo.1and$22,000,000forImprovementAreaNo.2.Alsoofnote, duetothe2%annualescalationinspecialtaxes,thespecialtaxrevenuestreamforbonding increaseswitheachfiscalyear,soupuntilsuchtimeasthebondsareissued,thebondingcapacity willincreasebyapproximately2%witheachfiscalyearthatpasses.Thus,staffrecommendsthat City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 4 of 9 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 37 File#:16-0450, Item#: 3. willincreasebyapproximately2%witheachfiscalyearthatpasses.Thus,staffrecommendsthat Councilapproveamaximumauthorizedindebtednessnottoexceed$20,000,00forImprovement AreaNo.1and$21,000,000forImprovementAreaNo.2whichisspecifiedinthe“Resolution DeclaringNecessitytoIncurBondedIndebtedness”thatisbeforeCounciltonight.TheMaster Developer concurs with staff’s recommendation. Relationship to Development Impact Fees (“DIF”) Consistentwithpastpractice,anyfacilityassociatedwithaDIFprogramconstructedbythe developer,onceaudited,canbeusedinlieuofpayingtheDIFfeesthatwouldotherwisebecollected atbuildingpermit.TotheextentthattheMasterDeveloperassignsthesefee“credits”toproperty outsideofCFDNo.16-I,thecorrespondingdollaramountoftheunderlyingfacilitycostwillnotbe eligibletobereimbursedwithCFDNo.16-Ibondproceeds.IffeecreditsaresplitamongCFDNo. 16-IpropertyandNon-CFDNo.16-Iproperty,theportionassignedtoCFDNo.16-Ipropertywould remaineligibleforCFDreimbursementsubjecttothetermsandconditionsofthe Acquisition/Financing Agreement. Proposed Special Taxes and CFD Report AcopyoftheCFDReport-CommunityFacilitiesDistrictNo.16-I(Millenia)(the“CFDReport”) preparedbytheSpecialTaxConsultant,WilldanFinancialServices,isincludedas Attachment2, andisonfile,andavailableforpublicreviewintheCityClerk'sOffice.Saidreportincorporatesthe "RateandMethodofApportionment"(RMA)(previouslyapprovedbyCouncilonAugust2,2016)for eachimprovementarea,thatestablishestheproceduresforlevyingthespecialtaxesinCFDNo.16- I.ThespecialtaxratesandmethodologyforlevyingtheannualspecialtaxaredescribedintheCFD Report and enumerated in the RMA. Thedevelopedresidentialandnon-residentialparcelswouldbetaxedatratesbasedonthelocation oftheparcelandthesquarefootageoftheresidentialunitortheacreageofthenon-residential parcel.Developedparcelsarethoseparcelsforwhichabuildingpermithasbeenissued.These specialtaxrateshavebeendeterminedbyapreliminarytaxspreadanalysisthatshowsatotal effectivetaxratethatislessthan2%forallplannedresidentialunits.Saidanalysis,whichisbased onestimatedhousesizesandprices,setstheamountoftheassignedspecialtaxthatmaybelevied bytheDistrictondevelopedresidentialparcels.Itshouldbenotedthatafinaltestisrequiredat escrowclosingusingactualhousesaleprices.Ifthe2%limitisexceeded,thedeveloper/builderis requiredtobuydownthelientoanamountsufficienttomeetthe2%criteria.Therearethreetax zones within Improvement Area No. 1 and two tax zones within Improvement Area No. 2. ThespecialtaxratesinImprovementAreaNo.1rangefrom$1,350to$1,799perdeveloped residentialunit.ThespecialtaxratesinImprovementAreaNo.2rangefrom$1,360to$1,628per developedresidentialunit.Theundevelopedandbackuptaxratesarebasedontheprojectedtotal amountofdevelopedspecialtaxeswithineachzoneofeachImprovementAreadividedbythe expectedtaxableacreageinsuchzonereducedbyacontingencyrate(5-10%).Thisisdoneto ensure that the special tax levy will be sufficient at each stage of development. PublicProperty,PropertyOwnerAssociationPropertyandopenspacewillbeexemptfromthe SpecialTaxontheconditionthatitdoesnotreducethesumofallTaxablePropertytolessthanthe necessaryamountoftaxableacresineachzonetogeneratetherequiredamountofspecialtax revenues.Anypropertywhichcannotbeclassifiedasexemptpropertybecausesuchclassification wouldreducetheAcreageofallTaxablePropertytolessthantheminimumtaxableacreageinanyofCity of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 5 of 9 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 38 File#:16-0450, Item#: 3. wouldreducetheAcreageofallTaxablePropertytolessthantheminimumtaxableacreageinanyof thefivezoneswillbeclassifiedasProvisionalPropertyandsubjecttothelevyofthespecialtaxat the same rate as Undeveloped Property. Thespecialtaxeswillbesubjecttoincreaseeachfiscalyearby2%andbondswouldbeissued basedondebtservicethatescalatesby2%eachyearcommensurately.This“2%escalator” provisionisaspecificexceptiontotheCFDPolicypursuanttotheFinancingPlanofthe Development Agreement. Value-to-Lien Ratio Policy Councilpolicyrequiresaminimum4:1value-to-lienratio.Aratiooflessthan4:1,butequaltoor greaterthan3:1,maybeapproved,inthesolediscretionofCouncil,whenitisdeterminedthataratio oflessthan4:1isfinanciallyprudentunderthecircumstancesofaparticularCFD.Afinalappraisal andlienratioanalysiswillbeavailableforCouncilconsiderationpriortothesaleofbondsforeach ImprovementArea.ThefirstbondsaleforImprovementAreaNo.1isprojectedtooccurincalendar year2018.Ifthefinalanalysisshowsparcelswhichfailtomeetthe4:1or3:1ratio,oneormoreof the following actions would be required: ·TheMasterDevelopercouldrequesttheuseofanEscrowBondstructurepursuanttothe Financing Plan of the Development Agreement; or, ·TheMasterDevelopercouldprovidecashorlettersofcredittomaintainthelienratiowithin the City criteria; or, ·TheprincipalamountofthebondstobeissuedforCFDNo.16-Iwillbereducedtocomply with City policy; or, ·TheMasterDevelopermayprovidesufficientinformationtoconvinceCouncilthatalesserlien ratio is still prudent. Maximum Tax Policy TheCFDPolicyestablishesthatthemaximumannualCommunityFacilitiesDistrictspecialtaxes applicabletoanynewlydevelopedresidentialpropertyshallbenomorethan1%ofthesalepriceof thehouse.Inaddition,theaggregateofallannualtaxesandassessments,excludingspecialtaxor assessments for maintenance, is limited to 2% of the sale price of the house. Apreliminarycalculationoftheoveralleffectivetotaltaxrate,usingestimatedbasehomeprices per amarketstudypreparedfortheMasterDeveloperbyathirdpartymarketstudyconsultant,hasbeen completedandallhomesfallwithinthe2%limit.Afinaltestwillbeperformedatescrowclosing usingtheactualsaleprice ofthehouse.CityPolicyrequiresthatatorpriortoeachclosingof escrow,theescrowcompanyshallapplya“calculationformula”previouslyapprovedbytheCity EngineertodeterminetheaggregateofregularCountytaxes,specialtaxesandassessment installments;thisrequirementisincludedintheAcquisition/FinancingAgreement.Ifthe2%limitwere exceeded,thedeveloper/builderwillberequiredtoprovidecashtobuydownthelientoanamount sufficienttomeetthe2%taxceiling.Compliancewiththisprocedurewouldensurethatthe aggregatespecialtaxtobepaidbytheinitialpurchaserofthehousemeetstheCity’scriteria,since the 2% limit is a City policy and the limit itself is not included in the rate and method of the district. Resolutions and Ordinance Therearethreeresolutionsandoneordinanceontoday’sagendathat,ifadopted,willaccomplishthe City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 6 of 9 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 39 File#:16-0450, Item#: 3. Therearethreeresolutionsandoneordinanceontoday’sagendathat,ifadopted,willaccomplishthe following: TheRESOLUTIONFORMINGANDESTABLISHINGCOMMUNITYFACILITIESDISTRICTNO.16-I (MILLENIA)istheformalactionformingandestablishingCommunityFacilitiesDistrictNo.16-I (Millenia),designatingtwoImprovementAreas,andauthorizingsubmittaloflevyofspecialtaxesto the qualified electors of each Improvement Area, and performs the following: ·Sets the name of the District; ·Identifies the CFD Report prepared by Willdan Financial Services as the report to be used for all future proceedings; ·EstablishesaSpecialTaxbyacontinuinglientosecurethebondsissuedforeach ImprovementArea.TheSpecialTaxissetforthintheRateandMethodof ApportionmentforeachImprovementArea,whichwillbeapprovedbytheadoptionof this Resolution; ·ImplementstheprovisionsoftheLocalAgencySpecialTaxandBondAccountabilityAct which became effective on January 1, 2001 by specifying that: o Each special tax shall be levied for the specific purposes set forth in the Resolution. o The proceeds of the levy of each such special tax shall be applied only to the specific applicable purposes set forth in the Resolution. o The District shall establish a separate account into which the proceeds of each such special tax shall be deposited. o The City Manager or his or her designee, acting for and on behalf of the District, shall annually file a report with the City Council as required pursuant to Government Code Section 50075.3. ·Submits the levy of the special tax to the property owners; ·Describes the type of facilities to be financed by the District; ·Approves the form of the Acquisition/Financing Agreement TheRESOLUTIONDECLARINGNECCESSITYTOINCURBONDEDINDEBTEDNESSisaformal actionsubmittingtotheQualifiedElectorsofeachImprovementAreaofCommunityFacilitiesDistrict No.16-I(Millenia)separatepropositionstoauthorizethelevyofaspecialtaxtherein,toauthorize suchCommunityFacilitiesDistricttoincurabondedindebtednessforeachsuchimprovementarea securedbythelevyofsuchspecialtaxthereintofinancecertaintypesofpublicfacilitiesandto establish an appropriations limit, and performs the following: •Declares that a bond issuance is necessary; •Describes the type of facilities to be financed collectively within the District; •Limits the bond term to 40 years for each bond issue; •Further implements the provisions of the Local Agency Special Tax and Bond Accountability Act by specifying that: o Such bonded indebtedness shall be incurred for the applicable specific single purpose set forth in the Resolution. o The proceeds of any such bonded indebtedness shall be applied only the applicable specific purpose identified in the Resolution. o The document or documents establishing the terms and conditions for the City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 7 of 9 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 40 File#:16-0450, Item#: 3. issuance of any such bonded indebtedness shall provide for the creation of an account into which the proceeds of such indebtedness shall be deposited. o The City Manager or his or her designee, acting for and on behalf of the District, shall annually file a report with this City Council as required by Government Code Section 53411. •Submits five (5) ballot propositions to the property owners (a) to levy a special tax within Improvement Area No. 1 pursuant to the rate and method of apportionment to pay for authorized purposes including debt service and eligible facilities, (b) to incur a bonded indebtedness not to exceed $20 million for Improvement Area No. 1, (c) to levy a special tax within Improvement Area No. 2 pursuant to the rate and method of apportionment to pay for authorized purposes including debt service and eligible facilities, (d) to incur a bonded indebtedness not to exceed $21 million for Improvement Area No. 2, and (e) to establish an appropriations limit for the District; •Establishes an election procedure. TheRESOLUTIONDECLARINGTHERESULTSOFASPECIALELECTIONistheResolution determining,declaring,andapprovingtheresultsoftheelectioninaccordancewiththeElections Code of the State of California. TheORDINANCEAUTHORIZINGTHELEVYOFASPECIALTAXauthorizesthelevyofthespecial taxineachImprovementArea,setsforthproceduresforlevyingandcollectingthespecialtaxes,and authorizesthespecialtaxestobesecuredbythelienimposedpursuanttoSections3114.5and 3115.5oftheStreetsandHighwaysCodeoftheStateofCalifornia,whichlienshallbeacontinuing lien and shall secure each levy of the special taxes. Future Actions Tonighttherewillbeanelectionfollowingthepublichearingforthelandownerstovoteonthe authorizationtolevyspecialtaxesforeachimprovementarea,theauthorizationtoincurabonded indebtednessofCFDNo.16-Iforeachimprovementareaandtoestablishanappropriationslimit. Oncethevotesarecast,Councilwillberequestedtocertifytheresultsoftheelectionand,ifthe ballotmeasuresareapprovedby2/3ofthequalifiedelectors(i.e.,thelandowners)votingonthe measures,CFDNo.16-Iwillbeauthorizedtolevysuchspecialtaxesandincursuchbonded indebtedness.CouncilwillthenberequestedtointroducetheOrdinanceauthorizingthelevyof specialtaxesofCFDNo.16-I.FutureactionsincludeenactingtheOrdinance(secondreading),the levy of special taxes, and actions associated with the issuance of bonds. DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT StaffhadreviewedthepropertyholdingsoftheCityCouncilandhasfoundnopropertyholdingwithin 500feetoftheboundariesofthepropertywhichisthesubjectofthisaction.Staffisnot independentlyaware,norhasstaffbeeninformedbyanyCityCouncilmember,ofanyotherfactthat may constitute a basis for a decision maker conflict of interest in this matter. LINK TO STRATEGIC GOALS TheCity’sStrategicPlanhasfivemajorgoals:OperationalExcellence,EconomicVitality,Healthy Community,StrongandSecureNeighborhoodsandaConnectedCommunity.OncetheDistrictis formedandbondsaresold,theproceedswillservetwoCityStrategicPlanmajorsgoals:Economic Vitality,viaadditionalcommercialactivities,andaConnectedCommunitybywayofenhanced City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 8 of 9 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 41 File#:16-0450, Item#: 3. Vitality,viaadditionalcommercialactivities,andaConnectedCommunitybywayofenhanced roadwayimprovementsandpedestrianorientedfacilitiesanddevelopmentintheEUC/Milleniaarea of the City. CURRENT YEAR FISCAL IMPACT AllexpensesincurredbytheCityinundertakingtheproceedingstoconsidertheformationofthe Districtandsubsequentlyauthorizing,issuingandsellingbondsoftheDistricttofinancethe acquisitionorconstructionoftheeligiblepublicfacilities(exceptthosecostsandexpenseswhichare contingentupontheissuanceofbondsfortheDistrictandarepayablesolelyfromtheproceedsof suchbonds)willbepaidforbyadvancesmadebytheMasterDeveloperpursuanttotheAdvance DepositandReimbursementAgreementpreviouslyenteredintobetweentheCityandMaster Developer,resultinginnonetfiscalimpacttotheCity’sGeneralFundorDevelopmentServices Fund. StaffanticipatesthatthemajorityoftheCFDNo.16-Iadministrationwillbecontractedout.TheCFD administration cost is estimated not to exceed $75,000 annually. InaccordancewiththeCFDPolicy,asconsiderationfortheCity’sagreementtousetheCity’s bondingauthoritytoprovidethefinancingmechanismfortheconstructionoftheproposed improvements,theMasterDeveloperwillpayonepercent(1%)ofthetotalbondsale.Said requirementismemorializedintheAcquisition/FinancingAgreementthatisbeforetheCouncilfor approvaltonight.Basedontheproposedbondsizingof$25.7millioninaggregate,saidtotal monetarycompensationwouldbeapproximately$257,000.Saidamountshallbepaidpriortoeach bondsalebasedontheprincipalamountofeachsuchsaleandwillbedepositedintotheGeneral Fund.TheCFDPolicyalsostipulatesthatsaidcompensationisnoteligibleforfinancingviaCFDNo. 16-I. ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT ThecoststoadministertheDistrict,ifestablished,andtheissuanceofbondsbytheDistrictshallbe paidfromtheproceedsofspecialtaxestobeleviedwithintheDistrictortheproceedsofthebonds issuedbytheDistrict.Thereis,therefore,noongoingfiscalimpactontheCity’sGeneralFundor Development Services Fund by this action. ATTACHMENTS 1.Recorded Boundary Map 2.CFD Report 3.Acquisition/Financing Agreement Staff Contact: Dave Kaplan, Development Services Department City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 9 of 9 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 42 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION 1 ORDINANCE NO. _________ ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, ACTING AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 16-I(MILLENIA),AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX IN IMPROVEMENT AREA NO. 1 AND IMPROVEMENT AREA NO. 2 OF SUCH COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT WHEREAS, the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA (the “City Council”), has initiated proceedings, held a public hearing, conducted an election and received a favorable vote from the qualified electors authorizing the levy of special taxes in the improvement areas of a community facilities district, all as authorized pursuant to the terms and provisions of the “Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982”, being Chapter 2.5, Part 1. Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California (the “Act”) and the City of Chula Vista Community Facilities District Ordinance enacted pursuant to the powers reserved by the City of Chula Vista under Sections 3, 5 and 7 of Article XI of the Constitution of the State of California (the “Ordinance”) (the Act and the Ordinance may be referred to collectively as the “Community Facilities District Law”). This community facilities district shall hereinafter be referred to as Community Facilities District No. 16-I (Millenia) (the “District”) and the improvement areas shall be hereinafter referred to as Improvement Area No. 1 and Improvement Area No. 2 (each, an “Improvement Area” or, collectively, the “Improvement Areas”). THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, ACTING AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 16-I (MILLENIA), DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1.This City Council does, by the passage of this ordinance, authorize the levy of special taxes on taxable properties located in Improvement Area No. 1 and Improvement Area No. 2 of the District pursuant to the applicable Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Taxes as set forth in Exhibit “A” attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (each, a “Rate and Method”). SECTION 2.This City Council, acting as the legislative body of the District, is hereby further authorized, by Resolution, to annually determine the special tax to be levied within each of the Improvement Areas for the then current tax year or future tax years; provided, however, the special tax to be levied shall not exceed the maximum special tax authorized to be levied pursuant to theapplicableRate and Method. SECTION 3.The special taxes herein authorized to be levied, to the extent possible, shall be collected in the same manner as ad valorem property taxes and shall be subject to the same penalties, procedure, sale and lien priority in any case of delinquency as applicable for ad valorem taxes; provided, however, the District may utilize a direct billing procedure for any special taxes that cannot be collected on the County tax roll or may, by resolution, elect to collect the special taxes at a different time or in a different manner if necessary to meet its financial obligations. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 43 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION 2 SECTION 4.The special taxes authorized to be levied shall be secured by the lien imposed pursuant to Sections 3114.5 and 3115.5 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, which lien shall be a continuing lien and shall secure each levy of the special taxes. The lien of the special taxesshall continue in force and effect until the special tax obligation is prepaid, permanently satisfied and canceled in accordance with Section 53344 ofthe Government Code of the State of California or until the special tax ceases to be levied by the City Council in the manner provided in Section 53330.5 of said Government Code. SECTION 5.This Ordinance shall be effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. Within fifteen (15) days after its adoption, the City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City pursuant to the provisions of Chula Vista’s City Charter, Section 312(b). Introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, California, on September 13, 2016; Enacted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, California, held on the ______ day of ________________, 2016, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: PREPARED BY:APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Kelly G. Broughton FASLA Glen R. Googins Director of Developmental Services City Attorney 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 44 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION A -3 EXHIBIT A RATESAND METHODSOF APPORTIONMENT FOR CITY OF CHULA VISTA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 16-I (MILLENIA) RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 16-I (MILLENIA) IMPROVEMENT AREA NO. 1 A Special Tax shall be levied on all Taxable Property within the boundaries of Improvement Area No. 1 of Community Facilities District No. 16-I(Millenia) of the City of Chula Vista (“IA1”) and collected each Fiscal Year commencing in Fiscal Year 2016-17, in an amount determined by the CFD Administrator through the application of the procedures described below. All of the real property within IA1, unless exempted by law or by the provisions hereof, shall be taxed for the purposes, to the extent, and in the manner herein provided. 1. DEFINITIONS The terms hereinafter set forth have the following meanings: “Acre” or “Acreage” means the land area of an Assessor’s Parcel as shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map, or if the land area is not shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map, the land area shown on the applicable Final Map. An Acre means 43,560 square feet of land. If the preceding maps for a land area are not available, the Acreage of such land area shall be determined by the City Engineer. “Act” means the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, being Chapter 2.5 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California. “Administrative Expense Requirement” means an annual amount equal to $75,000, or such lesser amount as may be designated by written instruction from an authorized representative of the City to the Fiscal Agent, to be allocated as the first priority of Special Taxes received each Fiscal Year for the payment of Administrative Expenses. “Administrative Expenses” means the following actual or reasonably estimated costs related to the administration of IA1 including, but not limited to: the costs of preparing and computing the Annual Special Tax (whether by the City or designee thereof or both); the costs of collecting the Special Taxes (whether by the City, the County or otherwise); the costs of remitting the Special Taxes to the Fiscal Agent; the costs of the Fiscal Agent(including its legal counsel) in the discharge of the duties required of it under the Fiscal Agent Agreement; the costs to the City, CFD No. 16-I, or any designee thereof complying with arbitrage rebate requirements, including without limitation rebate liability costs and periodic rebate calculations; the costs to the City, CFD No. 16-I, or any designee thereof complying with disclosure or reporting requirements of the City or CFD No. 16-I, associated with applicable federal andState laws; the costs associated 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 45 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION A -4 with preparing Special Tax disclosure statements and responding to public inquiries regarding the Special Taxes; the costs to the City, CFD No. 16-I, or any designee thereof related to an appeal of the Special Tax; and theCity’s annual administration fees and third party expenses. Administrative Expenses shall also include amounts estimated or advanced by the City or CFD No. 16-Ifor any other administrative purposes of CFD No. 16-I, including attorney’s fees and other costs related to commencing and pursuing any foreclosure of delinquent Special Taxes. “Annual Special Tax”means the Special Tax actually levied in any Fiscal Year on any Assessor’s Parcel. “Assessor” means the Assessor of the County of San Diego. “Assessor's Parcel” means a lot or parcel shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map with an assigned Assessor's Parcel Number. “Assessor's Parcel Map” means an official map of the Assessor designating parcels by Assessor’s Parcel Number. “Assessor's Parcel Number” means the number assigned to an Assessor's Parcel by the County for purposes of identification. “Assigned Special Tax” means the Special Tax of that name described in Section 3.A below. “Backup Special Tax” means the Special Tax of that name described in Section 3.B below. “Bonds” means any bonds or other debt of CFD No. 16-I issued or incurred forIA1, whether in one or more series, secured by the levy of Special Taxes. “Building Permit”means a building permit for construction of a Residential Unitor non- residential structure within IA1 issued by the City. “Building Square Footage” means all of the square footage of living area within the perimeter of a residential structure, not including any carport, walkway, garage, overhang, or similar area. The determination of Building Square Footage shall be made by the CFD Administrator by reference to the Building Permit(s) issued for such Assessor’s Parcel and/or by reference to appropriate records kept by the City. Building Square Footagefor a Residential Unitwill be based on the Building Permit(s) issued for such Residential Unitprior to it being classified as Occupied Residential Property, and shall not change as a result of additions or modifications made to such Residential Unitafter such classification as Occupied Residential Property. “Calendar Year”means the period commencing January 1 of any year and ending the following December 31. “CFD Administrator” means an authorized representative of the City, or designee thereof, responsible for determining the Special Tax Requirement, for preparing the Annual Special Tax roll and/or calculating the Backup Special Tax. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 46 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION A -5 “CFD No. 16-I” means the Community Facilities District No. 16-I(Millenia) of the City of Chula Vista. “City” means the City of Chula Vista, California. “City Council” means the City Council of the City acting as the legislative body of CFD No. 16-I under the Act. "Condominium" means a unit, whether attached or detached, meeting the statutory definition of a condominium contained in the California Civil Code Section 4285. “County” means the County of San Diego, California. “Debt Service” means for each Fiscal Year, the total amount of principal and interest payable on any Outstanding Bonds during the Calendar Year commencing on January 1 of such Fiscal Year. “Developed Property” means for each Fiscal Year, all Taxable Property, exclusive of Provisional Property, for which a Building Permit was issued prior to March1 of the previous Fiscal Year. An Assessor’s Parcel classified as Developed Property but for which the Building Permit that caused such Assessor’s Parcel to be classified as Developed Property has been cancelled and/or voided prior to the Fiscal Year for which Special Taxes are being levied shall be reclassified as Undeveloped Property, provided that the levy of the Annual Special Tax after such reclassification shall not be less than 1.1 times the annual Debt Service less Administrative Expenses on all Outstanding Bonds. If Bonds have not been issued, an Assessor’s Parcel classified as Developed Property for which such a Building Permit has been cancelled and/or voided shall be reclassified as Undeveloped Property. “Development Agreement” meansthat certain Development Agreement by and between the City of Chula Vista and McMillin Otay Ranch LLC adopted October 6, 2009 and recorded with the County of San Diego’s Recorder’s office on October 27, 2009 as Document Number 2009- 0595116, as may be amended and/or supplemented from time to time. “Exempt Property” means for eachFiscal Year, all Assessor’s Parcels designated as being exempt from Special Taxes pursuant to Section 5 below. “Final Map” means a subdivision of property by recordation of a final map, parcel map, or lot line adjustment, pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act (California GovernmentCode Section66410 et seq.) or recordation of a condominium plan pursuant to California Civil Code4285 that creates individual lots for which Building Permits may be issued without further subdivision. “Fiscal Year” means the period starting on July 1 and ending the following June 30. “Fiscal Agent” means the fiscal agent, trustee, or paying agent under the Fiscal Agent Agreement. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 47 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION A -6 “Fiscal Agent Agreement” means the fiscal agent agreement, indenture,resolution or other instrument pursuant to which Bonds are issued, as modified, amended and/or supplemented from time to time, and any instrument replacing or supplementing the same. “IA1”means Improvement Area No. 1 of CFD No. 16-I. “Land Use Class”means any of the classes listed in Table 1, 2, or 3under Section 3Abelow. Note: Land Uses Class is not in reference to a property’s zoning designation. “Lot(s)” means an individual legal lot created by a Final Map for which a building permit for residential construction has been or could be issued. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the case of an individual legal lot created by such a Final Map upon which Condominiums are entitled to be developed, the number of Lots allocable to such legal lot for purposes of calculating the Backup Special Tax applicable to such Final Map shall equal the number of Condominiums which are permitted to be constructed on such legal lot as shown on such Final Map. “Master Developer”means SLF IV-Millenia, LLC or its successors or assignees with as defined in the Development Agreement. “Maximum Special Tax” means for each Assessor’s Parcel, the maximum Special Tax, determined in accordance with Sections 3.C and 3.D below, which may be levied in a given Fiscal Year on such Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property. “Non-Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property for which a Building Permit has been issued for the purpose of constructing one or more non-residential units or structures. “Occupied Residential Property” means all Assessor Parcels of Residential Property for which title is held by an end user (homeowner). “Outstanding Bonds” means all Bonds which are deemed to be outstanding under the Fiscal Agent Agreement. “Prepayment Amount” means the amount required to prepay the Special Tax Obligation in full for an Assessor’s Parcel as described in Section 8.A below. “Property Owner Association Property” means any Assessor’s Parcel within the boundaries of IA1 owned in fee by a property owner association, including any master or sub-association. “Proportionately” or “Proportionate” means for Developed Property, that the ratio of the actual Special Tax levy to the applicable Assigned Special Tax or Backup Special Tax is equal for all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property. For Undeveloped Property, "Proportionately" means that the ratio of the actual Special Tax levy per Acre to the Maximum Special Tax per 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 48 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION A -7 Acre is equal for all Assessor's Parcels of Undeveloped Property. “Proportionately” may similarly be applied to other categories of Taxable Property as listed in Section 3below. “Provisional Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Public Property, Property Owner Association Property or property that would otherwise be classified as Exempt Property pursuant to the provisions of Section 5, but cannot be classified as Exempt Property because to do so would reduce the Acreage of all Taxable Property below the required minimum Acreage as set forth in Section 5. “Public Property” means any property within the boundaries of IA1, which is owned by, or irrevocably offered for dedication to the federal government, the State of California, the County, the City or any other public agency; provided however that any property owned by a public agency and leased to a private entity and subject to taxation under Section 53340.1 of the Act shall be taxed and classified in accordance with its use. “Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property for which a Building Permit has been issued for the purpose of constructing one or more Residential Units. “Residential Unit” means each separate residential dwelling unit that comprises an independent facility capable of conveyance or rental, separate from adjacent residential dwelling units. “Special Tax” means any special tax levied within IA1 pursuant to the Act and this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax. “Special Tax Obligation” means the total obligation of an Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property to pay the Special Tax for the remaining life of IA1. “Special Tax Requirement” means that amount required in any Fiscal Year to: (i) pay regularly scheduled Debt Service on all Outstanding Bonds; (ii) pay periodic costs on the Outstanding Bonds, including but not limited to, credit enhancement and rebate payments on the Outstanding Bonds; (iii) pay Administrative Expenses; (iv) pay any amounts required to establish or replenish any reserve funds for all Outstanding Bonds; (v) accumulate funds to pay directly for acquisition or construction of facilities provided that the inclusion of such amount does not cause an increase in the Special Tax to be levied on Undeveloped Property; and (vi) pay for reasonably anticipated delinquent Special Taxes based on (a) the average delinquency rate for special taxes levied in the previous Fiscal Year in all community facilities districts within the portion of the City commonly known as Otay Ranch for the first Fiscal Year in which Special Taxes are levied and (b) the delinquency rate for Special Taxes levied in the previous Fiscal YearwithinIA1for all subsequent Fiscal Years in which Special Taxes are levied; less (vii) a credit for funds available to reduce the Annual Special Tax levy, as determined by the CFD Administrator pursuant to the Fiscal Agent Agreement. “State” means the State of California. “Taxable Property” means all of the Assessor's Parcels within the boundaries of CFD, which are not exempt from the levy of the Special Tax pursuant to law or Section 5 below. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 49 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION A -8 “Undeveloped Property” means, for each Fiscal Year, all Taxable Property not classified as Developed Property or Provisional Property. “Zone A” means the specific geographic area designated as suchwithin IA1and as depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto. “Zone B” means the specific geographic area designated as suchwithin IA1and as depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto. “Zone C” means the specific geographic area designated as suchwithin IA1and as depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto. 2. LAND USE CLASSIFICATION Each Fiscal Year, beginning with Fiscal Year 2016-17, each Assessor’s Parcel within IA1 shall be classified as Taxable Property or Exempt Property. In addition, all Taxable Property shall further be classified as Developed Property, Undeveloped Property or Provisional Property, and all such Taxable Property shall be subject to the levy of Special Taxes in accordance with this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax determined pursuant to Sections 3 and 4 below. Furthermore, each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property shall be classified according to its applicable Land Use Class based on its Building Square Footage. For Assessor’s Parcels of Non-Residential Property developed with Condominiums (e.g., office or industrial condos), the Acreage applicable to each such Condominium for purposes of levying Special Taxes shall be computed from the Acreage of the legal lot created by the Final Map upon which such Condominiums are entitled to be developed, with the Acreage of such lot allocated to each Condominium on a pro-rata basis using the building square footage of such Condominium relative to the total building square footage of all Condominiums entitled to be developed on such lot. The determination of building square footage for each non-residential Condominium shall be made by reference to the applicable Building Permit, and to the extent a Building Permit has not been issued for all Condominiums to be located on the applicable legal lot, the building square footage attributable to any such Condominiums shall be determined from the recorded condominium plan,or applicable site plan, plot plan, or other appropriate records kept by the City as reasonably determined by the CFD Administrator. In the event the City takes ownership of a Condominium within IA1 and such property in all other respects meets the definition of Public Property as set forth in Section 1, such property shall be exempt from Special Taxes pursuant to Section 5. 3. SPECIAL TAX RATES A. Assigned Special Tax for Developed Property The Assigned Special Tax applicableto an Assessor’s Parcel classified as Developed Property commencing Fiscal Year 2016-17 shall be determined pursuant to Table 1, 2, or 3 below, as applicable. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 50 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION A -9 Table 1 Assigned Special Tax Rates for Developed Property within Zone A Land Land Use Type Building Square Footage Assigned Special TaxUse Class 1 Residential Property<1,500 $1,352per Residential Unit 2 Residential Property1,500 –2,200 $1,661per Residential Unit 3 Residential Property> 2,200 $1,799 per Residential Unit 4 Non-Residential PropertyN/A$6,000 per Acre Table2 Assigned Special Tax Rates for Developed Property within Zone B Land Land Use Type Building Square Footage Assigned Special TaxUse Class 1 Residential Property<1,500 $1,350per Residential Unit 2 Residential Property1,500 –2,200 $1,451per Residential Unit 3 Residential Property> 2,200 $1,649 per Residential Unit 4 Non-Residential PropertyN/A$6,000 per Acre 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 51 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION A -10 Table3 Assigned Special Tax Rates for Developed Property within Zone C Land Land Use Type Building Square Footage Assigned Special TaxUse Class 1 Residential Property<1,500 $1,350per Residential Unit 2 Residential Property1,500 –2,200 $1,451per Residential Unit 3 Residential Property> 2,200 $1,649 per Residential Unit 4 Non-Residential PropertyN/A$6,000 per Acre On each July 1, commencing July 1, 2017, the Assigned Special Taxfor Developed Property shall be increased by two percent (2.00%) of the amount in effect in the prior Fiscal Year. B. Backup Special Tax for Developed Property When a Final Map or a condominium plan is recorded within Zone A, Zone B,or Zone C the Backup Special Tax for Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property classified as Residential Property shall be determined as follows: For each Assessor’s Parcel of Residential Property or for each Assessor’s Parcel of Undeveloped Property to be classified as Residential Property upon its development within the Final Map area, the Backup Special Taxfor Fiscal Year 2016-17shall be the rate per Lot calculated according to the following formula: Zone A $27,502x A B =------------------------ L Zone B $29,057 x A B =------------------------ L 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 52 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION A -11 Zone C $6,316 x A B =------------------------ L The termshave the following meanings: B = Backup Special Tax per Lot A = Acreage classified or to be classified as Residential Property in such Final Map. The land area applicable to a Condominium shall be computed from the Acreage of the Lot on which the Condominium is located, with the Acreage for such Lot allocated equally among all of the Condominiums located or to be located on such Lot. L = For a Final Map, the number of Lots which are classified or to be classified as Residential Property. For each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property classified as Non-Residential Property or for each Assessor’s Parcel of Undeveloped Property to be classified as Non- Residential Property within the Final Map area, the Backup Special Taxfor Fiscal Year 2016-17shall be determined by multiplying $27,502for Zone A, $29,057for Zone B and $6,316forZone Cby the total Acreage of any such Assessor’s Parcel. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if Assessor’s Parcels of Residential Property, Non- Residential Property or Undeveloped Property for which the Backup Special Tax has been determined are subsequently changed or modified by recordation of a new or amended Final Map, then the Backup Special Tax applicable to such Assessor’s Parcels shall be recalculated toequal the total amount of Backup Special Tax that would have been generated if such change did not take place. On each July 1, commencing July 1, 2017, the Backup Special Taxapplicable to each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Propertyshall be increased by two percent (2.00%) of the amount in effect in the prior Fiscal Year. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 53 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION A -12 C. Maximum Special Tax for Developed Property Each Fiscal Year, the Maximum Special Tax for an Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property shall be the greater of the applicable Assigned Special Tax or Backup Special Tax. D. Maximum Special Tax for Provisional Property and Undeveloped Property The Maximum Special Tax for Provisional Property and Undeveloped Property commencing in Fiscal Year 2016-17shall be $27,502per Acre forZone A, $29,057per Acre for Zone B, and $6,316per Acre for Zone C. On each July 1, commencing July 1, 2017, theMaximum Special Tax for Provisional Property and Undeveloped Property shall be increased by two percent (2.00%) of the amount in effect inthe prior Fiscal Year. E. Multiple Land Use Classes In some instances an Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property may contain more than one Land Use Class. TheMaximum Special Tax that may be levied on such an Assessor’s Parcel shall only be levied on the Residential Property Land Use Class located on such Assessor’s Parcel. F. AdministrativeSpecialTax Reduction Prior to the issuance of Bonds, the Assigned Special Tax, Backup Special Tax, and Maximum Special Tax (collectively the “Special Tax Rates”) on Taxable Property may be reduced in accordance with, and subject to the conditions set forth in this paragraph. Upon the City’s receipt of a written request from Master Developer and the CFD Administrator, the Special Tax Rates on Taxable Property maybe reduced to a level which will provide not less than the sum of estimated Administrative Expense Requirement and one hundred ten percent (110%) of the estimated debt servicewith respect to the amount of Bonds requested to be issued in such written request. If it is reasonably determined by the CFD Administrator that the total effective tax rate on Residential Property, as determined in accordance with the Development Agreement, exceeds the maximum level allowed in the Development Agreement, the SpecialTax Rates may be reduced to the amount necessary to satisfy the maximum allowable effective tax rate requirement on Residential Property with the written consent of Master Developer, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, and the CFD Administrator. It shall not be required that reductions among each “Building Square Footage” range of Residential Property be proportional. Additionally, the “CFD Public FacilitiesCosts” amount in Section 8shall be reduced commensurate with any reductions to theSpecial Tax Rates pursuant to this paragraph, as reasonably determined by the CFD Administrator. A certificate in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit “B” shall 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 54 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION A -13 be used for purposes of evidencing the required written consent and effectuating the reduction to the Special Tax Rates. The reductions permitted pursuant to this paragraph shall be reflected in an amended Notice of Special Tax Lien which the City shall cause to be recorded. 4. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT For each Fiscal Year, commencing Fiscal Year 2016-17, the CFD Administrator shall levy the Special Tax on all Taxable Property in accordance with the following steps: Step 1:The Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property at up to 100% of the applicable Assigned Special Taxto satisfy the Special Tax Requirement; Step 2:If additional monies are needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement after Step 1 has been completed, the Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on each Assessor's Parcel of Undeveloped Property up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax for Undeveloped Property; Step 3:If additional monies are needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement after the first twosteps have been completed, then the Special Tax amount determined in Step 1 shall be increased Proportionately on each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax for Developed Property. Step 4: If additional monies are needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement after the first threesteps have been completed, then the Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on each Assessor’s Parcel of Provisional Property up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax for Provisional Property; Notwithstanding theabove, under no circumstances will the Special Tax levied in any Fiscal Year against any Assessor’s Parcel of Residential Property for which an occupancy permit for private residential use has been issued be increased as a result of a delinquency or default in the payment of the Special Tax applicable to any other Assessor’s Parcel within IA1 by more than ten percent (10%) above what would have been levied in the absence of such delinquencies or defaults. 5. EXEMPTIONS The CFD Administrator shall classify as Exempt Property (i) Assessor’s Parcels of Public Property, (ii) Assessor’s Parcels of PropertyOwner Association Property, (iii) Assessor’s Parcels which are used as places of worship and are exempt from ad valorem property taxes because they are owned by a religious organization, and (iv) Assessor’s Parcels with public or utility easements making impractical their utilization for other than the purposes set forth in the easement, provided that no such classification would reduce the sum of all TaxableProperty in IA1 to less than 9.53Acresfor Zone A, 12.67Acresfor Zone B, or 17.09Acresfor Zone C. Assessor’s Parcels which cannot be classified as Exempt Property because such classification 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 55 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION A -14 would reduce the sum of all Taxable Property in IA1 to less than 9.53Acresfor Zone A, 12.67 Acresfor Zone B, or 17.09Acresfor Zone C, shall be classified as Provisional Property and will continue to be subject to the IA1 Special Taxes accordingly. Tax exempt status for the purpose of this paragraph will be assigned by the CFD Administrator in the chronological order in which property becomes eligible for classification as Exempt Property. If the use of an Assessor’s Parcel of Exempt Property changes so that such Assessor’s Parcel is no longer classified as one of the uses set forth in the first paragraph of Section 5above that would make such Assessor’s Parcel eligible to be classified as Exempt Property, such Assessor’s Parcel shall cease to be classified as Exempt Property and shall be deemed to be Taxable Property. 6. APPEALS Any landowner who pays the Special Tax and claims the amount of the Special Tax levied on his or her Assessor’s Parcel is in error shall first consult with the CFD Administrator regarding such error not later than thirty-six (36) months after first having paid the first installment of the Special Tax that is disputed. If following such consultation the CFD Administrator determines that an error has occurred, then the CFD Administrator shall take any of the following actions, in order of priority, in order to correct the error: (i)Amend the Special Tax levy on the landowner’s Assessor’s Parcel(s) for the current Fiscal Year prior to the payment date, (ii)Require the CFD to reimburse the landowner for the amount of the overpayment to the extent of available CFD funds, or (iii)Grant a credit against, eliminate or reduce the future Special Taxes on the landowner’s Assessor’s Parcel(s) in the amount of the overpayment. If following such consultation and action by the CFD Administrator the landowner believes such error still exists, such person may file a written notice of appeal with the City Council. Upon the receipt of such notice, the City Council or designee may establish such procedures as deemed necessary to undertake the review of any such appeal. If the City Council or designee determines an error still exists, the CFD Administrator shall take any of the actions described as (i), (ii) and (iii) above, in order of priority, in order to correct the error. The CityCouncil or designee thereof shall interpret this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax for purposes of clarifying any ambiguities and make determinations relative to the administration of the Special Tax and any landowner appeals. The decision of the CityCouncil or designee shall be final and binding as to all persons. 7. COLLECTION OF SPECIAL TAXES Collection of the Annual Special Tax shall be made by the County in the same manner as ordinary ad valorem property taxes are collected and the Annual Special Tax shall be subject to the same penalties and the same lien priority in the case of delinquency as ad valorem taxes; 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 56 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION A -15 provided, however, that the City Councilmay provide for (i) other means of collecting the Special Tax, including direct billings thereof to the property owners; and (ii) judicial foreclosure of delinquent Annual Special Taxes. 8. PREPAYMENT OF SPECIAL TAX OBLIGATION A.Prepayment in Full Property owners may prepay and permanently satisfy the Special Tax Obligation by a cash settlement with the City as permitted under Government Code Section 53344. The following definitions apply to this Section 8: “CFD Public Facilities Costs” means $12,550,000or such lower number as (i) shall be determined by the CFD Administrator as sufficient to acquire or construct the facilities to be financed under the Act and financing program for IA1, or (ii) shall be determined by the City Councilconcurrently with a covenant that it will not issue any more Bonds (except refunding bonds). “Construction Fund” means the fund (regardless of its name) established pursuant to the Fiscal Agent Agreementto hold funds, which are currently available for expenditure to acquire or construct the facilities or pay fees authorized to be funded by CFD No. 16-I for IA1. “Future Facilities Costs” means the CFD Public Facilities Costs minus (i) costs previously paid from the Construction Fund to acquire or construct the facilities, (ii) monies currently on deposit in the Construction Fund, and (iii) monies currently on deposit in an escrow or other designated fund that are expected to be available to finance CFD Public Facilities Costs. “Outstanding Bonds” means all PreviouslyIssued Bonds, which remain outstanding as of the first interest and/or principal payment date following the current Fiscal Year excluding Bonds to be redeemed at a later date with proceeds of prior Special Tax prepayments. “Previously Issued Bonds” meansall Bonds that have been issued prior to the date of prepayment. The Special Tax Obligation applicable to an Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property, or Undeveloped Property for which a Building Permit has been issued may be prepaid and the obligation topay the Special Tax for such Assessor’s Parcel permanently satisfied as described herein, provided that a prepayment may be made with respect to a particular Assessor’s Parcel only if there are no delinquent Special Taxes with respect to such Assessor’s Parcel at the time of prepayment. An owner of an Assessor’s Parcel eligible to prepay the Special Tax Obligation shall provide the CFD Administrator with written notice of intent to prepay, and designate or identify the company or agency that will be actingas the escrow agent, if any. The CFD Administrator shall provide the owner with a 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 57 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION A -16 statement of the Prepayment Amount for such Assessor’s Parcel within thirty (30) days of the request, and may charge a reasonable fee for providing this service. Prepayment must be made at least 60 days prior to any redemption date for the Bonds to be redeemed with the proceeds of such prepaid Special Taxes, unless a shorter period is acceptable to the Fiscal Agentand the City. The Prepayment Amount (defined below) shall be calculated for each applicable Assessor’s Parcel or group of Assessor’s Parcels as summarized below (capitalized terms as defined below): Bond Redemption Amount plus Redemption Premium plus Future Facilities Prepayment Amount plus Defeasance Amount plus Prepayment Administrative Fees and Expenses less Reserve Fund Credit less Capitalized Interest Credit Total: equals Prepayment Amount As of the proposed date of prepayment, the Prepayment Amount (defined in Step 14 below) shall be calculated as follows: Step No.: 1.Confirm that no Special Tax delinquencies apply to such Assessor’s Parcel. 2.For Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property, determine the Maximum Special Tax. For Assessor’s Parcels of Undeveloped Property for which a Building Permit has beenissued, compute the Maximum Special Tax for that Assessor’s Parcel as though it was already designated as Developed Property, based upon the Building Permit which has already been issued for that Assessor’s Parcel. 3.Divide the Maximum Special Tax computedpursuant to paragraph 2 by the total expected Maximum Special Tax revenue for IA1 assuming all Building Permits have been issued (build-out) within IA1, excluding any Assessor’s Parcels for which the Special Tax Obligation has been previously prepaid. 4.Multiply the quotient computed pursuant to paragraph 3 by the Outstanding Bonds and round that number up to the nearest $5,000 increment to compute the amount of Outstanding Bonds to be retired and prepaid for all applicable Assessor’s Parcels (the “Bond Redemption Amount”). 5.Multiply the Bond Redemption Amount computed pursuant to paragraph 4 by the applicable redemption premium (expressed as a percentage), if any, on the 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 58 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION A -17 Outstanding Bonds to be redeemed at the first available call date (the “Redemption Premium”). 6.Compute the Future Facilities Costs. 7.Multiply the quotient computed pursuant to paragraph 3 by the amount determined pursuant to paragraph 6 to compute the amount of Future Facilities Costs to be prepaid (the “Future Facilities Prepayment Amount”). 8.Compute the amount needed to pay interest on the Bond Redemption Amount from the first bond interest and/or principal payment date following the current Fiscal Year until the expected redemption date for the Outstanding Bonds which, depending on the Fiscal Agent Agreement, may be as early as the next interest payment date. 9.Compute the amount the CFD Administrator reasonably expects to derive from the reinvestment of the Prepayment Amount less the Future Facilities Prepayment Amount and the Prepayment Administrative Fees from the date of prepayment until the redemption date for the Outstanding Bonds to be redeemed with the prepayment. 10.Subtract the amount computed in paragraph 9 from the amount computed in paragraph 8 (the “Defeasance Amount”). 11.Calculatethe administrative fees and expenses of CFD No. 16-IforIA1, including the costs of computation of the prepayment, the costs to invest the prepayment proceeds, the costs of redeemingthe Outstanding Bonds to be redeemed with the prepayment, and the costsof recording any notices to evidence the prepayment and the redemption (the “Prepayment Administrative Fees”). 12.If reserve funds for the Outstanding Bonds, if any, are at or above 100% of the reserve requirement (as defined in the Fiscal Agent Agreement) on the prepayment calculation date, a reserve fund credit shall be calculated as a reduction in the applicable reserve fund for the Outstanding Bonds to be redeemed pursuant to the prepayment (the “Reserve Fund Credit”). No Reserve Fund Credit shall be granted if, after the Prepayment Amount is calculated, reserve funds are below 100% of the reserve requirementafter taking into account such prepayment. 13.If any capitalized interest for the Outstanding Bonds will not have been expended at the time of the first interest and/or principal payment following the current Fiscal Year, a capitalized interest credit shall be calculated by multiplying the quotient computed pursuant to paragraph 3 by the expected balance in the capitalized interest fund after such firstinterest and/or principal payment (the “Capitalized Interest Credit”). 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 59 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION A -18 14.The amount to prepay the Special Tax Obligation is equal to the sum of the amounts computed pursuant to paragraphs 4, 5, 7, 10, and 11, less the amounts computed pursuant to paragraphs 12 and 13 (the “Prepayment Amount”). 15.From the Prepayment Amount, the sum of the amounts computed pursuant to paragraphs 4, 5, and 10, less the amounts computed pursuant to paragraphs 12 and 13 shall be deposited into the appropriate fund as established under the Fiscal Agent Agreementand be used to retire Outstanding Bonds or make Debt Service payments. The amount computed pursuant to paragraph 7 shall be deposited into the Construction Fund. The amount computed pursuant to paragraph 11 shall be retained by CFD No. 16-I. The Prepayment Amount may be sufficient to redeem an amount other than a $5,000 increment of Bonds. In such cases, the increment above $5,000 or integral multiple thereof will be retained in the appropriate fund established under the Fiscal Agent Agreementto redeem Bonds to be used with the next prepayment of Bonds. The CFD Administrator will confirm that all previously levied Special Taxes have been paid in full. With respect to any Assessor's Parcel for which the Special Tax Obligation is prepaid in full, once the CFD Administrator has confirmed that all previously levied Special Taxes have been paid, the City Councilshall cause a suitable notice to be recorded in compliance with the Act, to indicate the prepayment of the Special Tax Obligation and the release of the Special Tax lien on such Assessor’s Parcel, and the obligation of the owner of such Assessor's Parcel to pay the Special Tax shall cease. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no Special Tax prepayment shall be allowed unless the aggregate amount of Maximum Special Taxes less the Administrative Expense Requirement that may be levied on Taxable Property, respectively, after the proposed prepayment is at least 1.1 times the Debt Service on all Outstanding Bonds in each Fiscal Year. B.Partial Prepayment The Special Tax on an Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property or Undeveloped Property for which a Building Permit has been issued may be partially prepaid. The amount of the prepayment shall be calculated as in Section 8.A.; except that a partial prepayment shall be calculated according to the following formula: PP = (PE-A) x F+A These terms have the following meaning: PP = the partial prepayment PE = the Prepayment Amount calculated according to Section 8.A F = the percentage by which the owner of the Assessor’s Parcel(s) is partially prepaying the Special Tax Obligation 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 60 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION A -19 A = the Prepayment Administrative Fees and Expenses from Section 8.A The owner of any Assessor’s Parcel who desires such partial prepayment shall notify the CFD Administrator of (i) such owner’s intent to partially prepay the Special Tax Obligation, (ii) the percentage by which the Special Tax Obligation shall be prepaid, and (iii) the company or agency that will be acting as the escrow agent, if any. The CFD Administrator shall provide the owner with a statement of the amount required for the partial prepayment of the Special Tax Obligation for an Assessor’s Parcel within sixty (60) days of the request and may charge a reasonable fee for providing this service. With respect to any Assessor’s Parcel that is partially prepaid, the City shall (i) distribute the funds remitted to it according to Section 8.A., and (ii) indicate in the records of CFD No. 16-I forIA1 that there has been a partial prepayment of the Special Tax Obligation and that a portion of the Special Tax with respect to such Assessor’s Parcel, equal to the outstanding percentage (1.00 -F) of the Maximum Special Tax, shall continue to be levied on such Assessor’s Parcel. Notwithstandingthe foregoing, no partial prepayment shall be allowed unless the aggregate amount of Maximum Special Taxes less the Administrative Expense Requirementthat may be levied on Taxable Property, respectively, after the proposed partial prepayment is at least 1.1 times the Debt Service on all Outstanding Bonds in each Fiscal Year. 9. TERM OF SPECIAL TAX The Special Tax shall be levied as long as necessary to meet the Special Tax Requirement for a period not to exceed forty (40) Fiscal Years commencing with Fiscal Year 2016-17. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 61 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION A -20 EXHIBIT A [Attach CFD Boundary Map] 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 62 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION A -21 EXHIBIT B CITY OF CHULA VISTAAND CFD NO. 16-ICERTIFICATE 1.Pursuant to Section 3F of the Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax (the “RMA”), the City of Chula Vista (the “City”) and Community Facilities District No. 16-I of the City of Chula Vista (“CFD No. 16-I”) hereby agree to a reduction in the Special Tax for Developed Property, Undeveloped Property, and/or Provisional Property: (a)The information in the RMA relating to the Special Tax for Developed Property, Undeveloped Property, and Provisional Property shall be modified as follows: [insert Table 1, 2, and/or 3 showing revised Assigned Special Tax rates for Developed Property, insert revised Backup Special Tax rates for Developed Property by Zone, and insert change to Maximum Special Tax rates for Undeveloped Property and Provisional Property by Zone] (b)The CFD Public Facilities Costs in Section 8 shall be changed to $____________. 2.Special Tax ratesfor Taxable Property may only be modified prior to the issuance of Bonds. 3.Upon execution of the Certificate by the City and CFD No. 16-I the City shall cause an amended Notice of Special Tax Lien for IA1 to be recorded reflecting the modifications set forth herein. By execution hereof, the undersigned acknowledges, on behalf of the City of Chula Vista and CFD No. 16-I, receipt of this Certificate and modification of the RMA as set forth in this Certificate. CITY OF CHULA VISTA By: Date: CFD Administrator COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 16-I OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA By: Date: 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 63 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION B -1 RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 16-I (MILLENIA) IMPROVEMENT AREA NO. 2 A Special Tax shall be levied on all Taxable Property within the boundaries of Improvement Area No. 1 of Community Facilities District No. 16-I(Millenia) of the City of Chula Vista (“IA2”) and collected each Fiscal Year commencing in Fiscal Year 2016-17, in an amount determined by the CFD Administrator through the application of the procedures described below. All of the real property within IA2, unless exempted by law or by the provisions hereof, shall be taxed for the purposes, to the extent, and in the manner herein provided. 1. DEFINITIONS The terms hereinafter set forth have the following meanings: “Acre” or “Acreage” means the land area of an Assessor’s Parcel as shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map, or if the land area is not shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map, the land area shown on the applicable Final Map. An Acre means 43,560 square feet of land. If the preceding maps for a land area are not available, the Acreage of such land area shall be determined by the City Engineer. “Act” means the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, being Chapter 2.5 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California. “Administrative Expense Requirement” means an annual amount equal to $75,000, or such lesser amount as may be designated by written instruction from an authorized representative of the City to the Fiscal Agent, to be allocated as the first priority of Special Taxes received each Fiscal Year for the payment of Administrative Expenses. “Administrative Expenses” means the following actual or reasonably estimated costs related to the administration of IA2including, but not limited to: the costs of preparing and computing the Annual Special Tax (whether by the City or designee thereof or both); the costs of collecting the Special Taxes (whether by the City, the County or otherwise); the costs of remitting the Special Taxes to the Fiscal Agent; the costs of the Fiscal Agent(including its legal counsel) in the discharge of the duties required of it under the Fiscal Agent Agreement; the costs to the City, CFD No. 16-I, or any designee thereof complying with arbitrage rebate requirements, including without limitation rebate liability costs and periodic rebate calculations; the costs to the City, CFD No. 16-I, or any designee thereof complying with disclosure or reporting requirements of the City or CFD No. 16-I, associated with applicable federal and State laws; the costs associated with preparing Special Tax disclosure statements and responding to public inquiries regarding the Special Taxes; the costs to the City, CFD No. 16-I, or any designee thereof related to an appeal of the Special Tax; and the City’s annual administration fees and third party expenses. Administrative Expenses shall also include amounts estimated or advanced by the City or CFD No. 16-Ifor any other administrative purposes of CFD No. 16-I,including attorney’s fees and other costs related to commencing and pursuing any foreclosure of delinquent Special Taxes. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 64 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION B -2 “Annual Special Tax”means the Special Tax actually levied in any Fiscal Year on any Assessor’s Parcel. “Assessor” means the Assessor of the County of San Diego. “Assessor's Parcel” means a lot or parcel shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map with an assigned Assessor's Parcel Number. “Assessor's Parcel Map” means an official map of the Assessor designating parcels by Assessor’s Parcel Number. “Assessor's Parcel Number” means the number assigned to an Assessor's Parcel by the County for purposes of identification. “Assigned Special Tax” means the Special Tax of that name described in Section 3.A below. “Backup Special Tax” means the Special Tax of that name described in Section 3.B below. “Bonds” means any bonds or other debt of CFD No. 16-I issued or incurred forIA2, whether in one or more series, secured by the levy of Special Taxes. “Building Permit”means a building permit forconstruction of a Residential Unitor non- residential structure within IA2issued by the City. “Building Square Footage” means all of the square footage of living area within the perimeter of a residential structure, not including any carport, walkway, garage, overhang, or similar area. The determination of Building Square Footage shall be made by the CFD Administrator by reference to the Building Permit(s) issued for such Assessor’s Parcel and/or by reference to appropriate records kept by the City. Building Square Footagefor a Residential Unitwill be based on the Building Permit(s) issued for such Residential Unitprior to it being classified as Occupied Residential Property, and shall not change as a result of additions or modifications made to such Residential Unitafter such classification as Occupied Residential Property. “Calendar Year”means the period commencing January 1 of any year and ending the following December 31. “CFD Administrator” means an authorized representative of the City, or designee thereof, responsible for determining the Special Tax Requirement, for preparing the Annual Special Tax roll and/or calculating the Backup Special Tax. “CFD No. 16-I” means the Community Facilities District No. 16-I(Millenia) of the City of Chula Vista. “City” means the City of Chula Vista, California. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 65 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION B -3 “City Council” means the City Council of the City acting as the legislative body of CFD No. 16-I under the Act. "Condominium" means a unit, whether attached or detached, meeting the statutory definition of a condominium contained in the California Civil Code Section 4285. “County” means the County of San Diego, California. “Debt Service” means for each Fiscal Year, the total amount of principal and interest payable on any Outstanding Bonds during the Calendar Year commencing on January 1 of such Fiscal Year. “Developed Property” means for each Fiscal Year, all Taxable Property, exclusive of Provisional Property, for which a Building Permit was issued prior to March1 of the previous Fiscal Year. An Assessor’s Parcel classified as Developed Property but for which the Building Permit that caused such Assessor’s Parcel to be classified as Developed Property has been cancelled and/or voided prior to the Fiscal Year for which Special Taxes are being levied shall be reclassified as Undeveloped Property, provided that the levy of the Annual Special Tax after such reclassification shall not be less than 1.1 times the annual Debt Service less Administrative Expenses on all Outstanding Bonds. If Bonds have not been issued, an Assessor’s Parcel classified as Developed Property for which such a Building Permit has been cancelled and/or voided shall be reclassified as Undeveloped Property. “Development Agreement” meansthat certain Development Agreement by and between the City of Chula Vista and McMillin Otay Ranch LLC adopted October 6, 2009 and recorded with the County of San Diego’s Recorder’s office on October 27, 2009 as Document Number 2009- 0595116, as may be amended and/or supplemented from time to time. “Exempt Property” means for each Fiscal Year, all Assessor’s Parcels designated as being exempt from Special Taxes pursuant to Section 5 below. “Final Map” means a subdivision of property by recordation of a final map, parcel map, or lot line adjustment, pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act (California GovernmentCode Section66410 et seq.) or recordation of a condominium plan pursuant to California Civil Code4285 that creates individual lots for which Building Permits may be issued without further subdivision. “Fiscal Year” means the period starting on July 1 and ending the following June 30. “Fiscal Agent” means the fiscal agent, trustee, or paying agent under the Fiscal Agent Agreement. “Fiscal Agent Agreement” means the fiscal agent agreement, indenture,resolution or other instrument pursuant to which Bonds are issued, as modified, amended and/or supplemented from time to time, and any instrument replacing or supplementing the same. “IA2”means Improvement Area No. 2of CFD No. 16-I. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 66 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION B -4 “Land Use Class”means any of the classes listed in Table 1or 2 under Section 3Abelow. Note: Land Uses Class is not in reference to a property’s zoning designation. “Lot(s)” means an individual legal lot created by a Final Map for which a building permit for residential construction has been or could be issued. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the case of an individual legal lot created by such a Final Map upon which Condominiums are entitled to be developed, the number of Lots allocable to such legal lot for purposes of calculating the Backup Special Tax applicable to such Final Map shall equal the number of Condominiums which are permitted to be constructed on such legal lot as shown on such Final Map. “Master Developer”means SLF IV-Millenia, LLC or its successors or assignees as defined in the Development Agreement. “Maximum Special Tax” means for each Assessor’s Parcel, the maximum Special Tax, determined in accordance with Sections 3.C and 3.D below, which may be levied in agiven Fiscal Year on such Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property. “Non-Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property for which a Building Permit has been issued for the purpose of constructing one or more non-residential units or structures. “Occupied Residential Property” means all Assessor Parcels of Residential Property for which title is held by an end user (homeowner). “Outstanding Bonds” means all Bonds which are deemed to be outstanding under the Fiscal Agent Agreement. “Prepayment Amount” means the amount required to prepay the Special Tax Obligation in full for an Assessor’s Parcel as described in Section 8.A below. “Property Owner Association Property” means any Assessor’s Parcel within the boundaries of IA2 owned in fee by a property owner association, including any master or sub-association. “Proportionately” or “Proportionate” means for Developed Property, that the ratio of the actual Special Tax levy to the applicable Assigned Special Tax or Backup Special Tax is equal for all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property. For Undeveloped Property, "Proportionately" means that the ratio of the actual Special Tax levy per Acre to the Maximum Special Tax per Acre is equal for all Assessor's Parcels of Undeveloped Property. “Proportionately” may similarly be applied to other categories of Taxable Property as listed in Section 3below. “Provisional Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Public Property, Property Owner Association Property or property that would otherwise be classified as Exempt Property pursuant to the provisions of Section 5, but cannot be classified as Exempt Property because to do so would reduce the Acreage of all Taxable Property below the required minimum Acreage as set forth in Section 5. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 67 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION B -5 “Public Property” means any property within the boundaries of IA2, which is owned by, or irrevocably offered for dedication to the federal government, the State of California, the County, the City or any other public agency; provided however that any property owned by a public agency and leased to a private entity and subject to taxation under Section 53340.1 of the Act shall be taxed and classified in accordance with its use. “Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property for which a Building Permit has been issued for the purpose of constructing one or more Residential Units. “Residential Unit” means each separate residential dwelling unit that comprises an independent facility capable of conveyance or rental, separate from adjacent residential dwelling units. “Special Tax” means any special tax levied within IA2pursuant to the Act and this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax. “Special Tax Obligation” means the total obligation of an Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property to pay the Special Tax for the remaining life of IA2. “Special Tax Requirement” means that amount required in any Fiscal Year to: (i) pay regularly scheduled Debt Service on all Outstanding Bonds; (ii) pay periodic costs on the Outstanding Bonds, including but not limited to, credit enhancement and rebate payments on the Outstanding Bonds; (iii) pay Administrative Expenses; (iv) pay any amounts required to establish or replenish any reservefunds for all Outstanding Bonds; (v) accumulate funds to pay directly for acquisition or construction of facilities provided that the inclusion of such amount does not cause an increase in the Special Tax to be levied on Undeveloped Property; and (vi) payfor reasonably anticipated delinquent Special Taxes based on (a) the average delinquency rate for special taxes levied in the previous Fiscal Year in all community facilities districts within the portion of the City commonly known as Otay Ranch for the first Fiscal Year in which Special Taxes are levied and (b) the delinquency rate for Special Taxes levied in the previous Fiscal YearwithinIA2 for all subsequent Fiscal Years in which Special Taxes are levied; less (vii) a credit for funds available to reduce the Annual Special Tax levy, as determined by the CFD Administrator pursuant to the Fiscal Agent Agreement. “State” means the State of California. “Taxable Property” means all of the Assessor's Parcels within the boundaries of CFD, which are not exempt from the levy of the Special Tax pursuant to law or Section 5 below. “Undeveloped Property” means, for each Fiscal Year, all Taxable Property not classified as Developed Property or Provisional Property. “Zone A” means the specific geographic area designated as suchwithin IA2and as depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 68 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION B -6 “Zone B” means the specific geographic area designated as suchwithin IA2and as depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto. 2. LAND USE CLASSIFICATION Each Fiscal Year, beginning with Fiscal Year 2016-17, each Assessor’s Parcel within IA2shall be classified as Taxable Property or Exempt Property. In addition, all Taxable Property shall further be classified as Developed Property, Undeveloped Property or Provisional Property, and allsuch Taxable Property shall be subject to the levy of Special Taxes in accordance with this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax determined pursuant to Sections 3 and 4 below. Furthermore, each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property shall be classified according to its applicable Land Use Class based on its Building Square Footage. For Assessor’s Parcels of Non-Residential Property developed with Condominiums (e.g., office or industrial condos), the Acreage applicable to each such Condominium for purposes of levying Special Taxes shall be computed from the Acreage of the legal lot created by the Final Map upon which such Condominiums are entitled to be developed, with the Acreage of such lot allocated to each Condominium on a pro-rata basis using the building square footage of such Condominium relative to the total building square footage of all Condominiums entitled to be developed on such lot. The determination of building square footage for each non-residential Condominium shall be made by reference to the applicable Building Permit, and to the extent a Building Permit has not been issued for all Condominiums to be located on the applicable legal lot, the building square footage attributable to any such Condominiums shall be determined from the recorded condominium plan, or applicable site plan, plot plan, or other appropriate records kept by the City as reasonably determined by the CFD Administrator. In the event the City takes ownership of a Condominium within IA2 and such property in all other respects meets the definition of Public Property as set forth in Section 1, such property shall be exempt from Special Taxes pursuant to Section 5. 3. SPECIAL TAX RATES A. Assigned Special Tax for Developed Property The Assigned Special Tax applicableto an Assessor’s Parcel classified as Developed Property commencing Fiscal Year 2016-17 shall be determined pursuant to Table 1 or 2 below, as applicable. Table 1 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 69 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION B -7 Assigned Special Tax Rates for Developed Property within Zone A Land Land Use Type Building Square Footage Assigned Special TaxUse Class 1 Residential Property ≤ 1,450 $1,360 per Residential Unit 2 Residential Property>1,450 $1,628 per Residential Unit 3 Non-Residential PropertyN/A$6,000 per Acre Table2 Assigned Special Tax Rates for Developed Property within Zone B Land Land Use Type Building Square Footage Assigned Special TaxUse Class 1 Residential Property ≤ 1,450 $1,360 per Residential Unit 2 Residential Property>1,450 $1,628 per Residential Unit 3 Non-Residential PropertyN/A$6,000 per Acre On each July 1, commencing July 1, 2017, the Assigned Special Taxfor Developed Property shall be increased by two percent (2.00%) of the amount in effect in the prior Fiscal Year. B. Backup Special Tax for Developed Property When a Final Map or a condominium plan is recorded within Zone A or Zone Bthe Backup Special Tax for Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property classified as Residential Property shall be determined as follows: For each Assessor’s Parcel of Residential Property or for each Assessor’s Parcel of Undeveloped Property to be classified as Residential Property upon its development 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 70 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION B -8 within the Final Map area, the Backup Special Taxfor Fiscal Year 2016-17shall be the rate per Lot calculated according to the following formula: Zone A $46,358x A B =------------------------ L Zone B $6,316 x A B =------------------------ L The terms have the following meanings: B = Backup Special Tax per Lot A = Acreage classified or to be classified as Residential Property in such Final Map. The land area applicable to a Condominium shall be computed from the Acreage of the Lot on which the Condominium is located, with the Acreage for such Lot allocated equally among all of the Condominiums located or to be located on such Lot. L = For a Final Map, the number of Lots which are classified or to be classified as Residential Property. For each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property classified as Non-Residential Property or for each Assessor’s Parcel of Undeveloped Property to be classified as Non- Residential Property within the Final Map area, the Backup Special Taxfor Fiscal Year 2016-17shall be determined by multiplying $46,358for Zone A and $6,316forZone B by the total Acreage of any such Assessor’s Parcel. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if Assessor’s Parcels of Residential Property, Non- Residential Property or Undeveloped Property for which the Backup Special Tax has been determined are subsequently changed or modified by recordation of a new or amended Final Map, then the Backup Special Tax applicable to such Assessor’s Parcels shall be recalculated to equal the total amount of Backup Special Tax that would have been generated if such change did not take place. On each July 1, commencing July 1, 2017, the Backup Special Taxapplicable to each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Propertyshall be increased by two percent (2.00%) of the amount in effect in the prior Fiscal Year. C. Maximum Special Tax for Developed Property Each Fiscal Year, the Maximum Special Tax for an Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property shall be the greater of the applicable Assigned Special Tax orBackup Special Tax. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 71 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION B -9 D. Maximum Special Tax for Provisional Property and Undeveloped Property The Maximum Special Tax for Provisional Property and Undeveloped Property commencing in Fiscal Year 2016-17shall be $46,358per Acre for Zone Aand$6,316 per Acre for Zone B. On each July 1, commencing July 1, 2017, theMaximum Special Tax for Provisional Property and Undeveloped Property shall be increased by two percent (2.00%) of the amount in effect in the prior Fiscal Year. E. Multiple Land Use Classes In some instances an Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property may contain more than one Land Use Class. TheMaximum Special Tax that may be levied on such an Assessor’s Parcel shall only be levied on the Residential Property Land Use Class located on suchAssessor’s Parcel. F. AdministrativeSpecialTax Reduction Prior to the issuance of Bonds, the Assigned Special Tax, Backup Special Tax, and Maximum Special Tax (collectively the “Special Tax Rates”) on Taxable Property may be reduced in accordance with, and subject to the conditions set forth in this paragraph. Upon the City’s receipt of a written request from Master Developer and the CFD Administrator, the Special Tax Rates on Taxable Property may be reduced to a level which will provide not less than the sum of estimated Administrative Expense Requirement and one hundred ten percent (110%) of the estimated debt servicewith respect to the amount of Bonds requested to be issued in such written request. If it is reasonably determined by the CFD Administrator that the total effective tax rate on Residential Property, as determined in accordance with the Development Agreement, exceeds the maximum level allowed in the Development Agreement, the Special Tax Rates may be reduced to the amount necessary to satisfy the maximum allowable effective tax rate requirement on Residential Property with the written consent of Master Developer, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, and the CFD Administrator. It shall not be required that reductions among each “Building Square Footage” range of Residential Property be proportional. Additionally, the “CFD Public FacilitiesCosts” amount in Section 8shall be reduced commensurate with any reductions to theSpecial Tax Rates pursuant to this paragraph, as reasonably determined by the CFD Administrator. A certificate in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit “B” shall be used for purposes of evidencing the required written consent and effectuating the reduction to the Special Tax Rates. The reductions permitted pursuant to this paragraph shall be reflected in an amended Notice of Special Tax Lien which the City shall cause to be recorded. 4. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 72 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION B -10 For each Fiscal Year, commencing Fiscal Year 2016-17, the CFD Administrator shall levy the Special Tax on all Taxable Property in accordance with the following steps: Step 1:The Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property at up to 100% of the applicable Assigned Special Taxto satisfy the Special Tax Requirement; Step 2:If additional monies are needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement after Step 1 has been completed, the Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on each Assessor's Parcel of Undeveloped Property up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax for UndevelopedProperty; Step 3:If additional monies are needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement after the first twosteps have been completed, then the Special Tax amount determined in Step 1 shall be increased Proportionately on each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax for Developed Property. Step 4: If additional monies areneeded to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement after the first threesteps have been completed, then the Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on each Assessor’s Parcel of Provisional Property up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax for Provisional Property; Notwithstanding the above, under no circumstances will the Special Tax levied in any Fiscal Year against any Assessor’s Parcel of Residential Property for which an occupancy permit for private residential use has been issued be increased as a result of a delinquency or default in the payment of the Special Tax applicable to any other Assessor’s Parcel within IA2by more than ten percent (10%) above what would have been levied in the absence of such delinquencies or defaults. 5. EXEMPTIONS The CFDAdministrator shall classify as Exempt Property (i) Assessor’s Parcels of Public Property, (ii) Assessor’s Parcels of PropertyOwner Association Property, (iii) Assessor’s Parcels which are used as places of worship and are exempt from ad valorem propertytaxes because they are owned by a religious organization, and (iv) Assessor’s Parcels with public or utility easements making impractical their utilization for other than the purposes set forth in the easement, provided that no such classification would reduce the sum of all Taxable Property in IA2 to less than 14.89Acresfor Zone A or 7.92Acresfor Zone B. Assessor’s Parcels which cannot be classified as Exempt Property because such classification would reduce the sum of all Taxable Property in IA2to less than 14.89Acresfor Zone A or 7.92Acresfor Zone B shall be classified as Provisional Property and will continue to be subject to the IA2Special Taxes accordingly. Tax exempt status for the purpose of this paragraph will be assigned by the CFD Administrator in the chronological order in which property becomes eligible for classification as Exempt Property. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 73 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION B -11 If the use of an Assessor’s Parcel of Exempt Property changes so that such Assessor’s Parcel is no longer classified as one of the uses set forth in the first paragraph of Section 5above that would make such Assessor’s Parcel eligible to be classified as Exempt Property, such Assessor’s Parcel shall cease to be classified as Exempt Property and shall be deemed to be Taxable Property. 6. APPEALS Any landowner who pays the Special Tax and claims the amount of the Special Tax levied on his or her Assessor’s Parcel is in error shall first consult with the CFD Administrator regarding such error not later than thirty-six (36) months after first havingpaid the first installment of the Special Tax that is disputed. If following such consultation the CFD Administrator determines that an error has occurred, then the CFD Administrator shall take any of the following actions, in order of priority, in order to correct the error: (iv)Amend the Special Tax levy on the landowner’s Assessor’s Parcel(s) for the current Fiscal Year prior to the payment date, (v)Require the CFD to reimburse the landowner for the amount of the overpayment to the extent of available CFD funds, or (vi)Grant a credit against, eliminate or reduce the future Special Taxes on the landowner’s Assessor’s Parcel(s) in the amount of the overpayment. If following such consultation and action by the CFD Administrator the landowner believes such error still exists, such person may file a written notice of appeal with the City Council. Upon the receipt of such notice, the City Council or designee may establish such procedures as deemed necessary to undertake the review of any such appeal. If the City Council or designee determines an error still exists, the CFD Administrator shall take any of the actions described as (i), (ii) and (iii) above, in order of priority, in order to correct the error. The CityCouncil or designee thereof shall interpret this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax for purposes of clarifying any ambiguities and make determinations relative to the administration of the Special Tax and any landowner appeals. The decision of the CityCouncil or designee shall be final and binding as to all persons. 7. COLLECTION OF SPECIAL TAXES Collection of the Annual Special Tax shall be made by the County in the same manner as ordinary ad valorem property taxes are collected and the Annual Special Tax shall be subject to the same penalties and the same lien priority in the case of delinquency as ad valorem taxes; provided, however, that the City Councilmay provide for (i) other means of collecting the Special Tax, including direct billings thereof to the property owners; and (ii) judicial foreclosure of delinquent Annual Special Taxes. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 74 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION B -12 8. PREPAYMENT OF SPECIAL TAX OBLIGATION C.Prepayment in Full Property owners may prepay and permanently satisfy the Special Tax Obligation by a cash settlement with the City as permitted under Government Code Section 53344. The following definitions apply to this Section 8: “CFD Public Facilities Costs” means $12,900,000or such lower number as (i) shall be determined by the CFD Administrator as sufficient to acquire or construct the facilities to be financed under the Act and financing program for IA2, or (ii) shall be determined by the City Councilconcurrently with a covenant that it will not issue any more Bonds (except refunding bonds). “Construction Fund” means the fund (regardless of its name) established pursuant to the Fiscal Agent Agreementto hold funds, which are currently available for expenditure to acquire or construct the facilities or pay fees authorized to be funded by CFD No. 16-I for IA2. “Future Facilities Costs” means the CFD Public Facilities Costs minus (i) costs previously paid from the Construction Fund to acquire or construct the facilities, (ii) monies currently on deposit in the Construction Fund, and (iii) monies currently on deposit in an escrow or other designated fund that are expected to be available to finance CFD Public Facilities Costs. “Outstanding Bonds” means all PreviouslyIssued Bonds, which remain outstanding as of the first interest and/or principal payment date following the current Fiscal Year excluding Bonds to be redeemed at a later date with proceeds of prior Special Tax prepayments. “Previously Issued Bonds” meansall Bonds that have been issued prior to the date of prepayment. The Special Tax Obligation applicable to an Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property, or Undeveloped Property for which a Building Permit has been issued may be prepaid and the obligation topay the Special Tax for such Assessor’s Parcel permanently satisfied as described herein, provided that a prepayment may be made with respect to a particular Assessor’s Parcel only if there are no delinquent Special Taxes with respect to such Assessor’s Parcel at the time of prepayment. An owner of an Assessor’s Parcel eligible to prepay the Special Tax Obligation shall provide the CFD Administrator with written notice of intent to prepay, and designate or identify the company or agency that will be actingas the escrow agent, if any. The CFD Administrator shall provide the owner with a statement of the Prepayment Amount for such Assessor’s Parcel within thirty (30) days of the request, and may charge a reasonable fee for providing this service. Prepayment must be made at least 60 days prior to any redemption date for the Bonds to be redeemed 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 75 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION B -13 with the proceeds of such prepaid Special Taxes, unless a shorter period is acceptable to the Fiscal Agentand the City. The Prepayment Amount (defined below) shall be calculated for each applicable Assessor’s Parcel or group of Assessor’s Parcels as summarized below (capitalized terms as defined below): Bond Redemption Amount plus Redemption Premium plus Future Facilities Prepayment Amount plus Defeasance Amount plusPrepayment Administrative Fees and Expenses less Reserve Fund Credit less Capitalized Interest Credit Total: equals Prepayment Amount As of the proposed date of prepayment, the Prepayment Amount (defined in Step 14 below) shall be calculated as follows: Step No.: 16.Confirm that no Special Tax delinquencies apply to such Assessor’s Parcel. 17.For Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property, determine the Maximum Special Tax. For Assessor’s Parcels of Undeveloped Property for which a Building Permit has been issued, compute the Maximum Special Tax for that Assessor’s Parcel as though it was already designated as Developed Property, based upon the Building Permit which has already been issued for that Assessor’s Parcel. 18.Divide the Maximum Special Tax computed pursuant to paragraph 2 by the total expected Maximum Special Tax revenue for IA2assuming all Building Permits have been issued (build-out) within IA2, excluding any Assessor’s Parcels for which the Special Tax Obligation has been previously prepaid. 19.Multiply the quotient computed pursuant to paragraph 3 by the Outstanding Bonds and round that number up to the nearest $5,000 increment to compute the amount of Outstanding Bonds to be retired and prepaid for all applicable Assessor’s Parcels (the “Bond Redemption Amount”). 20.Multiply the Bond Redemption Amount computed pursuant to paragraph 4 by the applicable redemption premium (expressed as a percentage), if any, on the Outstanding Bonds to be redeemed at the first available call date (the “Redemption Premium”). 21.Compute the Future Facilities Costs. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 76 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION B -14 22.Multiply the quotient computed pursuant to paragraph 3 by the amount determined pursuant to paragraph 6 to compute the amount of Future Facilities Costs to be prepaid (the “Future Facilities Prepayment Amount”). 23.Compute the amount needed to pay interest on the Bond Redemption Amount from the first bond interest and/or principal payment date following the current Fiscal Year until the expected redemption date for the Outstanding Bonds which, depending onthe Fiscal Agent Agreement, may be as early as the next interest payment date. 24.Compute the amount the CFD Administrator reasonably expects to derive from the reinvestment of the Prepayment Amount less the Future Facilities Prepayment Amount and the Prepayment Administrative Fees from the date of prepayment until the redemption date for the Outstanding Bonds to be redeemed with the prepayment. 25.Subtract the amount computed in paragraph 9 from the amount computed in paragraph 8 (the “Defeasance Amount”). 26.Calculate the administrative fees and expenses of CFD No. 16-IforIA2, including the costs of computation of the prepayment, the costs to invest the prepayment proceeds, the costs of redeemingthe Outstanding Bonds to be redeemed with the prepayment, and the costs of recording any notices to evidence the prepayment and the redemption (the “Prepayment Administrative Fees”). 27.If reserve funds for the Outstanding Bonds, if any, are at or above 100% of the reserve requirement (as defined in the Fiscal Agent Agreement) on the prepayment calculation date, a reserve fund credit shall be calculated as a reduction in the applicable reserve fund for the Outstanding Bonds to be redeemed pursuant to the prepayment (the “Reserve Fund Credit”). No Reserve Fund Credit shall be granted if, after the Prepayment Amount is calculated, reserve funds are below 100% of the reserve requirementafter taking into account such prepayment. 28.If any capitalized interest for the Outstanding Bonds will not have been expended at the time ofthe first interest and/or principal payment following the current Fiscal Year, a capitalized interest credit shall be calculated by multiplying the quotient computed pursuant to paragraph 3 by the expected balance in the capitalized interest fund after such first interest and/or principal payment (the “Capitalized Interest Credit”). 29.The amount to prepay the Special Tax Obligation is equal to the sum of the amounts computed pursuant to paragraphs 4, 5, 7, 10, and 11, less the amounts computed pursuant to paragraphs 12 and 13 (the “Prepayment Amount”). 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 77 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION B -15 30.From the Prepayment Amount, the sum of the amounts computed pursuant to paragraphs 4, 5, and 10, less the amounts computed pursuant to paragraphs 12 and 13 shall be deposited into the appropriate fund as established under the Fiscal Agent Agreementand be used to retire Outstanding Bonds or make Debt Service payments. The amount computed pursuant to paragraph 7 shall be deposited into the Construction Fund. The amount computed pursuant to paragraph 11 shall be retained by CFD No. 16-I. The Prepayment Amountmay be sufficient to redeem an amount other than a $5,000 increment of Bonds. In such cases, the increment above $5,000 or integral multiple thereof will be retained in the appropriate fund established under the Fiscal Agent Agreementto redeem Bonds to be used with the next prepayment of Bonds. The CFD Administrator will confirm that all previously levied Special Taxes have been paid in full. With respect to any Assessor's Parcel for which the Special Tax Obligation is prepaid in full, once the CFD Administrator has confirmed that all previously levied Special Taxes have been paid, the City Councilshall cause a suitable notice to be recorded in compliance with the Act, to indicate the prepayment of the Special Tax Obligation and the release of the Special Tax lien on such Assessor’s Parcel, and the obligation of the owner of such Assessor's Parcel to pay the Special Tax shall cease. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no Special Tax prepayment shall be allowed unless the aggregate amount of Maximum Special Taxes less the Administrative Expense Requirement that may be levied on Taxable Property, respectively, after the proposed prepayment is at least 1.1 times the Debt Service on all Outstanding Bonds in each Fiscal Year. D.Partial Prepayment The Special Tax onan Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property or Undeveloped Property for which a Building Permit has been issued may be partially prepaid. The amount of the prepayment shall be calculated as in Section 8.A.; except that a partial prepayment shall be calculated according to the following formula: PP = (PE-A) x F+A These terms have the following meaning: PP = the partial prepayment PE = the Prepayment Amount calculated according to Section 8.A F = the percentage by which the owner of the Assessor’s Parcel(s) is partially prepaying the Special Tax Obligation A = the Prepayment Administrative Fees and Expenses from Section 8.A The owner of any Assessor’s Parcel who desires such partial prepayment shall notify the CFD Administrator of (i) such owner’s intent to partially prepay the Special Tax 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 78 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION B -16 Obligation, (ii) the percentage by which the Special Tax Obligation shall be prepaid, and (iii) the company or agency that will be acting as the escrow agent, if any. The CFD Administrator shall provide the owner with a statement of the amount required for the partial prepayment of the Special Tax Obligation for an Assessor’s Parcel within sixty (60) days of the request and may charge a reasonable fee for providing this service. With respect to any Assessor’s Parcel that is partially prepaid, the City shall (i) distribute the funds remitted to it according to Section 8.A., and (ii) indicate in the records of CFD No. 16-I forIA2that there has been a partial prepayment of the Special Tax Obligation and that a portion of the Special Tax with respect to such Assessor’s Parcel, equal to the outstanding percentage (1.00 -F) of the Maximum Special Tax, shall continue to be levied on such Assessor’s Parcel. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no partial prepayment shall be allowed unless the aggregate amount of Maximum Special Taxes less the Administrative Expense Requirementthat may be levied on Taxable Property, respectively, after the proposed partial prepayment is at least 1.1 times the Debt Service on all Outstanding Bonds in each Fiscal Year. 9. TERM OF SPECIAL TAX The Special Tax shall be levied as long as necessary to meet the Special Tax Requirement for a period not to exceed forty (40) Fiscal Years commencing with Fiscal Year 2016-17. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 79 B -17 EXHIBIT A [Attach CFD Boundary Map] 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 80 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION B 18 EXHIBIT B CITY OF CHULA VISTAAND CFD NO. 16-ICERTIFICATE 1. Pursuant to Section 3F of the Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax (the “RMA”), the City of Chula Vista (the “City”) and Community Facilities District No. 16-I of the City of Chula Vista (“CFD No. 16-I”) hereby agreeto a reduction in the Special Tax for Developed Property, Undeveloped Property, and/or Provisional Property: (c)The information in the RMA relating to the Special Tax for Developed Property, Undeveloped Property, and Provisional Property shall be modified as follows: [insert Table 1and/or2 showing revised Assigned Special Tax rates for Developed Property, insert revised Backup Special Tax rates for Developed Property by Zone, and insert change to Maximum Special Tax rates for Undeveloped Property and Provisional Property by Zone] (d)The CFD Public Facilities Costs in Section 8 shall be changed to $____________. 4.Special Tax ratesfor Taxable Property may only be modified prior to the issuance of Bonds. 5.Upon execution of the Certificate by the City and CFD No. 16-I the City shall cause an amended Notice of Special Tax Lien for IA2 to be recorded reflecting the modifications set forth herein. By execution hereof, the undersigned acknowledges, on behalf of the City of Chula Vista and CFD No. 16-I, receipt of this Certificate and modification of the RMA as set forth in this Certificate. CITY OF CHULA VISTA By: Date: CFD Administrator COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 16-I OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA By: Date: 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 81 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Pa g e 82 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Pa g e 83 C I T Y O F Chula Vista CFD Report Community Facilities District No. 16-I (Millenia) August 2016 Prepared by: 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 84 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 1 II. GENERAL DESCRIPTION & BOUNDARIES OF CFD NO. 16‐I ................................. 2 III. DESCRIPTION OF FACILITIES ......................................................................... 3 IV. COST ESTIMATES ....................................................................................... 4 V. RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX ................................. 5 EXHIBIT A (BOUNDARY MAP) .............................................................................. 6 EXHIBIT B (PRELIMINARY CFD REPORT) ................................................................. 9 EXHIBIT C (RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT, IMPROVEMENT AREA NO. 1) ..... 11 EXHIBIT D (RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT, IMPROVEMENT AREA NO. 2) ..... 31 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 85 Page 1 I. Introduction WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista (hereinafter referred to as the “City Council”), in the State of California, did, pursuant to the terms and provisions of Chapter 2.5 of Part 1, of Division 2, of Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California, as amended (the “Act”), adopted a Resolution of Intention for the proposed formation of City of Chula Vista Community Facilities District No. 16‐I (Millenia) (“CFD No. 16‐I”). WHEREAS, this Community Facilities District Report (“Report”) is being provided to the City Council and generally contains the following: 1. A brief description of Community Facilities District No. 16‐I (Millenia) of the City of Chula Vista (“CFD NO. 16‐I”); 2. A brief description of the Facilities required at the time of formation to meet the needs of CFD No. 16‐I. 3. A brief description of the Boundaries of CFD 16‐I; and 4. An estimate of the cost of financing the bonds used to pay for the Facilities, including all costs associated with formation of the District, issuance of bonds, determination of the amount of any special taxes, collection of any special taxes, or costs otherwise incurred in order to carry out the authorized purposes of the City with respect to the District, and any other incidental expenses to be paid through the proposed financing. For particulars, reference is made to the Resolution of Intention, Resolution No. 2016‐I54 as previously approved. All capitalized terms not defined herein are defined in the Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax section (Exhibits C and D) of this report. NOW THEREFORE Willdan Financial Services, the appointed responsible firm directed to prepare the Report, pursuant to the provisions of the Code, does hereby submit the following: 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 86 Page 2 II. General Description & Boundaries of CFD No. 16‐I A description of the exterior boundaries of the territory proposed for inclusion in CFD No. 16‐I, including properties and parcels of land proposed to be subject to the levy of a Special Tax by CFD No. 16‐I, is shown on the boundary map designated as “PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 16‐I (MILLENIA)”, which is on file in the office of the Clerk of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista and was recorded with the County Recorder of the County of San Diego on August 11, 2016 in Book 46 of Maps of Assessment and Community Facilities Districts at Page 2 and as Instrument Number 2016‐7000326. A copy of the map is attached hereto as Exhibit A and hereby incorporated by reference. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 87 Page 3 III. Description of Facilities The types of facilities eligible to be financed by the District are street (both on‐site grid streets and boundary arterials) and bridge improvements, including grading, paving, curbs and gutters, sidewalks, trails, medians, traffic signalization and signage, street lights, utilities, storm water drainage, detention and treatment, and landscaping and irrigation related thereto, sewer collection and conveyance facilities, off site storm detention and treatment facilities, park and recreation facilities (including land and improvements), fire facilities and equipment, library facilities and equipment, transit facilities, fiber optic telecommunication system facilities, general governmental office, administrative and meeting facilities, bus and rapid transit facilities and land, rights of way and easements necessary for any of such facilities. Notwithstanding the foregoing, only equipment with a useful life of five (5) years or more will be eligible to be financed. This description of the public capital facilities is general in nature. The final nature and location of improvements and facilities will be determined upon the preparation of final plans and specifications. The final plans and specifications may show substitutes in lieu of, or modifications to, proposed work. Any such substitution shall not be a change or modification in the proceedings as long as the facilities provide a service substantially similar to that as set forth in the Report. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 88 Page 4 IV. Cost Estimates The proposed maximum authorized bonded indebtedness for CFD No. 16‐I is $20,000,000 for Improvement Area No. 1 and $21,000,000 for Improvement Area No. 2. The actual amount of bonds sold will depend upon a number of factors including interest rate on the bonds and compliance with the value‐to‐lien ratio criteria. Based on the special tax revenue expected to be generated from properties within CFD No. 16‐I, it is currently estimated to support a total bonded indebtedness of approximately $12.5 million for Improvement Area No. 1 and $13.2 million for Improvement Area No. 2 (assuming a 5.0% interest rate and a 30‐year bond term). Aggregate bond issuances of $25.7 million would yield approximately $20.7 million in net bond proceeds for eligible facilities. The balance would provide for a reserve fund, capitalized interest, initial administration expenses, district formation and bond issuance costs. The proceeds of CFD No. 16‐I will be used to fund public facilities as described in Exhibit B of this report. The estimated cost of such facilities is approximately $94.4 million, however, as noted above it is not currently anticipated that the CFD will generate sufficient funds to finance all of the costs. Any facilities costs not covered by CFD bond proceeds and special taxes will remain the responsibility of the developer pursuant to the project conditions of approval, the project development agreement, or other applicable governing documents. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 89 Page 5 V. Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax The Rate and Method of Apportionment (RMA) provide sufficient information to allow a property owner within CFD No. 16‐I to estimate the Maximum Special Tax for his or her property. It also includes method of prepayment in full or prepayment in part and the procedure for prepayments. For particulars on the rate and method of apportionment, reference is made to Exhibit C and Exhibit D of this report. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 90 Page 6 EXHIBIT A Boundary Map 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 91 Page 7 20 1 6 - 0 9 - 2 0 Ag e n d a Pa c k e t Page 92 Page 8 20 1 6 - 0 9 - 2 0 Ag e n d a Pa c k e t Page 93 Page 9 EXHIBIT B Preliminary CFD Budget 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 94 Page 10 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 95 Page 11 EXHIBIT C Rate and Method of Apportionment Improvement Area No. 1 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 96 Page 12 RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX CITY OF CHULA VISTA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 16-I (MILLENIA) IMPROVEMENT AREA NO. 1 A Special Tax shall be levied on all Taxable Property within the boundaries of Improvement Area No. 1 of Community Facilities District No. 16-I (Millenia) of the City of Chula Vista (“IA1”) and collected each Fiscal Year commencing in Fiscal Year 2016-17, in an amount determined by the CFD Administrator through the application of the procedures described below. All of the real property within IA1, unless exempted by law or by the provisions hereof, shall be taxed for the purposes, to the extent, and in the manner herein provided. 1. DEFINITIONS The terms hereinafter set forth have the following meanings: “Acre” or “Acreage” means the land area of an Assessor’s Parcel as shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map, or if the land area is not shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map, the land area shown on the applicable Final Map. An Acre means 43,560 square feet of land. If the preceding maps for a land area are not available, the Acreage of such land area shall be determined by the City Engineer. “Act” means the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, being Chapter 2.5 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California. “Administrative Expense Requirement” means an annual amount equal to $75,000, or such lesser amount as may be designated by written instruction from an authorized representative of the City to the Fiscal Agent, to be allocated as the first priority of Special Taxes received each Fiscal Year for the payment of Administrative Expenses. “Administrative Expenses” means the following actual or reasonably estimated costs related to the administration of IA1 including, but not limited to: the costs of preparing and computing the Annual Special Tax (whether by the City or designee thereof or both); the costs of collecting the Special Taxes (whether by the City, the County or otherwise); the costs of remitting the Special Taxes to the Fiscal Agent; the costs of the Fiscal Agent (including its legal counsel) in the discharge of the duties required of it under the Fiscal Agent Agreement; the costs to the City, CFD No. 16-I, or any designee thereof complying with arbitrage rebate requirements, including without limitation rebate liability costs and periodic rebate calculations; the costs to the City, CFD No. 16- I, or any designee thereof complying with disclosure or reporting requirements of the City or CFD No. 16-I, associated with applicable federal and State laws; the costs associated with preparing Special Tax disclosure statements and responding to public inquiries regarding the Special Taxes; the costs to the City, CFD No. 16-I, or any designee thereof related to an appeal of the Special Tax; and the City’s annual administration fees and third party expenses. Administrative Expenses shall also include amounts estimated or advanced by the City or CFD No. 16-I for any other administrative purposes of CFD No. 16-I, including attorney’s fees and other costs related to commencing and pursuing any foreclosure of delinquent Special Taxes. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 97 Page 13 “Annual Special Tax” means the Special Tax actually levied in any Fiscal Year on any Assessor’s Parcel. “Assessor” means the Assessor of the County of San Diego. “Assessor's Parcel” means a lot or parcel shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map with an assigned Assessor's Parcel Number. “Assessor's Parcel Map” means an official map of the Assessor designating parcels by Assessor’s Parcel Number. “Assessor's Parcel Number” means the number assigned to an Assessor's Parcel by the County for purposes of identification. “Assigned Special Tax” means the Special Tax of that name described in Section 3.A below. “Backup Special Tax” means the Special Tax of that name described in Section 3.B below. “Bonds” means any bonds or other debt of CFD No. 16-I issued or incurred for IA1, whether in one or more series, secured by the levy of Special Taxes. “Building Permit” means a building permit for construction of a Residential Unit or non- residential structure within IA1 issued by the City. “Building Square Footage” means all of the square footage of living area within the perimeter of a residential structure, not including any carport, walkway, garage, overhang, or similar area. The determination of Building Square Footage shall be made by the CFD Administrator by reference to the Building Permit(s) issued for such Assessor’s Parcel and/or by reference to appropriate records kept by the City. Building Square Footage for a Residential Unit will be based on the Building Permit(s) issued for such Residential Unit prior to it being classified as Occupied Residential Property, and shall not change as a result of additions or modifications made to such Residential Unit after such classification as Occupied Residential Property. “Calendar Year” means the period commencing January 1 of any year and ending the following December 31. “CFD Administrator” means an authorized representative of the City, or designee thereof, responsible for determining the Special Tax Requirement, for preparing the Annual Special Tax roll and/or calculating the Backup Special Tax. “CFD No. 16-I” means the Community Facilities District No. 16-I (Millenia) of the City of Chula Vista. “City” means the City of Chula Vista, California. “City Council” means the City Council of the City acting as the legislative body of CFD No. 16- I under the Act. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 98 Page 14 "Condominium" means a unit, whether attached or detached, meeting the statutory definition of a condominium contained in the California Civil Code Section 4285. “County” means the County of San Diego, California. “Debt Service” means for each Fiscal Year, the total amount of principal and interest payable on any Outstanding Bonds during the Calendar Year commencing on January 1 of such Fiscal Year. “Developed Property” means for each Fiscal Year, all Taxable Property, exclusive of Provisional Property, for which a Building Permit was issued prior to March 1 of the previous Fiscal Year. An Assessor’s Parcel classified as Developed Property but for which the Building Permit that caused such Assessor’s Parcel to be classified as Developed Property has been cancelled and/or voided prior to the Fiscal Year for which Special Taxes are being levied shall be reclassified as Undeveloped Property, provided that the levy of the Annual Special Tax after such reclassification shall not be less than 1.1 times the annual Debt Service less Administrative Expenses on all Outstanding Bonds. If Bonds have not been issued, an Assessor’s Parcel classified as Developed Property for which such a Building Permit has been cancelled and/or voided shall be reclassified as Undeveloped Property. “Development Agreement” means that certain Development Agreement by and between the City of Chula Vista and McMillin Otay Ranch LLC adopted October 6, 2009 and recorded with the County of San Diego’s Recorder’s office on October 27, 2009 as Document Number 2009- 0595116, as may be amended and/or supplemented from time to time. “Exempt Property” means for each Fiscal Year, all Assessor’s Parcels designated as being exempt from Special Taxes pursuant to Section 5 below. “Final Map” means a subdivision of property by recordation of a final map, parcel map, or lot line adjustment, pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act (California Government Code Section 66410 et seq.) or recordation of a condominium plan pursuant to California Civil Code 4285 that creates individual lots for which Building Permits may be issued without further subdivision. “Fiscal Year” means the period starting on July 1 and ending the following June 30. “Fiscal Agent” means the fiscal agent, trustee, or paying agent under the Fiscal Agent Agreement. “Fiscal Agent Agreement” means the fiscal agent agreement, indenture, resolution or other instrument pursuant to which Bonds are issued, as modified, amended and/or supplemented from time to time, and any instrument replacing or supplementing the same. “IA1” means Improvement Area No. 1 of CFD No. 16-I. “Land Use Class” means any of the classes listed in Table 1, 2, or 3 under Section 3A below. Note: Land Uses Class is not in reference to a property’s zoning designation. “Lot(s)” means an individual legal lot created by a Final Map for which a building permit for residential construction has been or could be issued. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the case of an individual legal lot created by such a Final Map upon which Condominiums are entitled to be 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 99 Page 15 developed, the number of Lots allocable to such legal lot for purposes of calculating the Backup Special Tax applicable to such Final Map shall equal the number of Condominiums which are permitted to be constructed on such legal lot as shown on such Final Map. “Master Developer” means SLF IV-Millenia, LLC or its successors or assignees with as defined in the Development Agreement. “Maximum Special Tax” means for each Assessor’s Parcel, the maximum Special Tax, determined in accordance with Sections 3.C and 3.D below, which may be levied in a given Fiscal Year on such Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property. “Non-Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property for which a Building Permit has been issued for the purpose of constructing one or more non-residential units or structures. “Occupied Residential Property” means all Assessor Parcels of Residential Property for which title is held by an end user (homeowner). “Outstanding Bonds” means all Bonds which are deemed to be outstanding under the Fiscal Agent Agreement. “Prepayment Amount” means the amount required to prepay the Special Tax Obligation in full for an Assessor’s Parcel as described in Section 8.A below. “Property Owner Association Property” means any Assessor’s Parcel within the boundaries of IA1 owned in fee by a property owner association, including any master or sub-association. “Proportionately” or “Proportionate” means for Developed Property, that the ratio of the actual Special Tax levy to the applicable Assigned Special Tax or Backup Special Tax is equal for all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property. For Undeveloped Property, "Proportionately" means that the ratio of the actual Special Tax levy per Acre to the Maximum Special Tax per Acre is equal for all Assessor's Parcels of Undeveloped Property. “Proportionately” may similarly be applied to other categories of Taxable Property as listed in Section 3 below. “Provisional Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Public Property, Property Owner Association Property or property that would otherwise be classified as Exempt Property pursuant to the provisions of Section 5, but cannot be classified as Exempt Property because to do so would reduce the Acreage of all Taxable Property below the required minimum Acreage as set forth in Section 5. “Public Property” means any property within the boundaries of IA1, which is owned by, or irrevocably offered for dedication to the federal government, the State of California, the County, the City or any other public agency; provided however that any property owned by a public agency and leased to a private entity and subject to taxation under Section 53340.1 of the Act shall be taxed and classified in accordance with its use. “Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property for which a Building Permit has been issued for the purpose of constructing one or more Residential Units. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 100 Page 16 “Residential Unit” means each separate residential dwelling unit that comprises an independent facility capable of conveyance or rental, separate from adjacent residential dwelling units. “Special Tax” means any special tax levied within IA1 pursuant to the Act and this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax. “Special Tax Obligation” means the total obligation of an Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property to pay the Special Tax for the remaining life of IA1. “Special Tax Requirement” means that amount required in any Fiscal Year to: (i) pay regularly scheduled Debt Service on all Outstanding Bonds; (ii) pay periodic costs on the Outstanding Bonds, including but not limited to, credit enhancement and rebate payments on the Outstanding Bonds; (iii) pay Administrative Expenses; (iv) pay any amounts required to establish or replenish any reserve funds for all Outstanding Bonds; (v) accumulate funds to pay directly for acquisition or construction of facilities provided that the inclusion of such amount does not cause an increase in the Special Tax to be levied on Undeveloped Property; and (vi) pay for reasonably anticipated delinquent Special Taxes based on (a) the average delinquency rate for special taxes levied in the previous Fiscal Year in all community facilities districts within the portion of the City commonly known as Otay Ranch for the first Fiscal Year in which Special Taxes are levied and (b) the delinquency rate for Special Taxes levied in the previous Fiscal Year within IA1 for all subsequent Fiscal Years in which Special Taxes are levied; less (vii) a credit for funds available to reduce the Annual Special Tax levy, as determined by the CFD Administrator pursuant to the Fiscal Agent Agreement. “State” means the State of California. “Taxable Property” means all of the Assessor's Parcels within the boundaries of CFD, which are not exempt from the levy of the Special Tax pursuant to law or Section 5 below. “Undeveloped Property” means, for each Fiscal Year, all Taxable Property not classified as Developed Property or Provisional Property. “Zone A” means the specific geographic area designated as such within IA1 and as depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto. “Zone B” means the specific geographic area designated as such within IA1 and as depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto. “Zone C” means the specific geographic area designated as such within IA1 and as depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 101 Page 17 2. LAND USE CLASSIFICATION Each Fiscal Year, beginning with Fiscal Year 2016-17, each Assessor’s Parcel within IA1 shall be classified as Taxable Property or Exempt Property. In addition, all Taxable Property shall further be classified as Developed Property, Undeveloped Property or Provisional Property, and all such Taxable Property shall be subject to the levy of Special Taxes in accordance with this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax determined pursuant to Sections 3 and 4 below. Furthermore, each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property shall be classified according to its applicable Land Use Class based on its Building Square Footage. For Assessor’s Parcels of Non-Residential Property developed with Condominiums (e.g., office or industrial condos), the Acreage applicable to each such Condominium for purposes of levying Special Taxes shall be computed from the Acreage of the legal lot created by the Final Map upon which such Condominiums are entitled to be developed, with the Acreage of such lot allocated to each Condominium on a pro-rata basis using the building square footage of such Condominium relative to the total building square footage of all Condominiums entitled to be developed on such lot. The determination of building square footage for each non-residential Condominium shall be made by reference to the applicable Building Permit, and to the extent a Building Permit has not been issued for all Condominiums to be located on the applicable legal lot, the building square footage attributable to any such Condominiums shall be determined from the recorded condominium plan, or applicable site plan, plot plan, or other appropriate records kept by the City as reasonably determined by the CFD Administrator. In the event the City takes ownership of a Condominium within IA1 and such property in all other respects meets the definition of Public Property as set forth in Section 1, such property shall be exempt from Special Taxes pursuant to Section 5. 3. SPECIAL TAX RATES A. Assigned Special Tax for Developed Property The Assigned Special Tax applicable to an Assessor’s Parcel classified as Developed Property commencing Fiscal Year 2016-17 shall be determined pursuant to Table 1, 2, or 3 below, as applicable. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 102 Page 18 Table 1 Assigned Special Tax Rates for Developed Property within Zone A Land Land Use Type Building Square Footage Assigned Special Tax Use Class 1 Residential Property < 1,500 $1,352 per Residential Unit 2 Residential Property 1,500 – 2,200 $1,661 per Residential Unit 3 Residential Property > 2,200 $1,799 per Residential Unit 4 Non-Residential Property N/A $6,000 per Acre Table 2 Assigned Special Tax Rates for Developed Property within Zone B Land Land Use Type Building Square Footage Assigned Special Tax Use Class 1 Residential Property < 1,500 $1,350 per Residential Unit 2 Residential Property 1,500 – 2,200 $1,451 per Residential Unit 3 Residential Property > 2,200 $1,649 per Residential Unit 4 Non-Residential Property N/A $6,000 per Acre 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 103 Page 19 Table 3 Assigned Special Tax Rates for Developed Property within Zone C Land Land Use Type Building Square Footage Assigned Special Tax Use Class 1 Residential Property < 1,500 $1,350 per Residential Unit 2 Residential Property 1,500 – 2,200 $1,451 per Residential Unit 3 Residential Property > 2,200 $1,649 per Residential Unit 4 Non-Residential Property N/A $6,000 per Acre On each July 1, commencing July 1, 2017, the Assigned Special Tax for Developed Property shall be increased by two percent (2.00%) of the amount in effect in the prior Fiscal Year. B. Backup Special Tax for Developed Property When a Final Map or a condominium plan is recorded within Zone A, Zone B, or Zone C the Backup Special Tax for Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property classified as Residential Property shall be determined as follows: For each Assessor’s Parcel of Residential Property or for each Assessor’s Parcel of Undeveloped Property to be classified as Residential Property upon its development within the Final Map area, the Backup Special Tax for Fiscal Year 2016-17 shall be the rate per Lot calculated according to the following formula: Zone A $27,502 x A B = ------------------------ L Zone B $29,057 x A B = ------------------------ L 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 104 Page 20 Zone C $6,316 x A B = ------------------------ L The terms have the following meanings: B = Backup Special Tax per Lot A = Acreage classified or to be classified as Residential Property in such Final Map. The land area applicable to a Condominium shall be computed from the Acreage of the Lot on which the Condominium is located, with the Acreage for such Lot allocated equally among all of the Condominiums located or to be located on such Lot. L = For a Final Map, the number of Lots which are classified or to be classified as Residential Property. For each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property classified as Non-Residential Property or for each Assessor’s Parcel of Undeveloped Property to be classified as Non-Residential Property within the Final Map area, the Backup Special Tax for Fiscal Year 2016-17 shall be determined by multiplying $27,502 for Zone A, $29,057 for Zone B and $6,316 for Zone C by the total Acreage of any such Assessor’s Parcel. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if Assessor’s Parcels of Residential Property, Non- Residential Property or Undeveloped Property for which the Backup Special Tax has been determined are subsequently changed or modified by recordation of a new or amended Final Map, then the Backup Special Tax applicable to such Assessor’s Parcels shall be recalculated to equal the total amount of Backup Special Tax that would have been generated if such change did not take place. On each July 1, commencing July 1, 2017, the Backup Special Tax applicable to each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property shall be increased by two percent (2.00%) of the amount in effect in the prior Fiscal Year. C. Maximum Special Tax for Developed Property Each Fiscal Year, the Maximum Special Tax for an Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property shall be the greater of the applicable Assigned Special Tax or Backup Special Tax. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 105 Page 21 D. Maximum Special Tax for Provisional Property and Undeveloped Property The Maximum Special Tax for Provisional Property and Undeveloped Property commencing in Fiscal Year 2016-17 shall be $27,502 per Acre for Zone A, $29,057 per Acre for Zone B, and $6,316 per Acre for Zone C. On each July 1, commencing July 1, 2017, the Maximum Special Tax for Provisional Property and Undeveloped Property shall be increased by two percent (2.00%) of the amount in effect in the prior Fiscal Year. E. Multiple Land Use Classes In some instances an Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property may contain more than one Land Use Class. The Maximum Special Tax that may be levied on such an Assessor’s Parcel shall only be levied on the Residential Property Land Use Class located on such Assessor’s Parcel. F. Administrative Special Tax Reduction Prior to the issuance of Bonds, the Assigned Special Tax, Backup Special Tax, and Maximum Special Tax (collectively the “Special Tax Rates”) on Taxable Property may be reduced in accordance with, and subject to the conditions set forth in this paragraph. Upon the City’s receipt of a written request from Master Developer and the CFD Administrator, the Special Tax Rates on Taxable Property may be reduced to a level which will provide not less than the sum of estimated Administrative Expense Requirement and one hundred ten percent (110%) of the estimated debt service with respect to the amount of Bonds requested to be issued in such written request. If it is reasonably determined by the CFD Administrator that the total effective tax rate on Residential Property, as determined in accordance with the Development Agreement, exceeds the maximum level allowed in the Development Agreement, the Special Tax Rates may be reduced to the amount necessary to satisfy the maximum allowable effective tax rate requirement on Residential Property with the written consent of Master Developer, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, and the CFD Administrator. It shall not be required that reductions among each “Building Square Footage” range of Residential Property be proportional. Additionally, the “CFD Public Facilities Costs” amount in Section 8 shall be reduced commensurate with any reductions to the Special Tax Rates pursuant to this paragraph, as reasonably determined by the CFD Administrator. A certificate in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit “B” shall be used for purposes of evidencing the required written consent and effectuating the reduction to the Special Tax Rates. The reductions permitted pursuant to this paragraph shall be reflected in an amended Notice of Special Tax Lien which the City shall cause to be recorded. 4. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT For each Fiscal Year, commencing Fiscal Year 2016-17, the CFD Administrator shall levy the Special Tax on all Taxable Property in accordance with the following steps: 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 106 Page 22 Step 1: The Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property at up to 100% of the applicable Assigned Special Tax to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement; Step 2: If additional monies are needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement after Step 1 has been completed, the Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on each Assessor's Parcel of Undeveloped Property up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax for Undeveloped Property; Step 3: If additional monies are needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement after the first two steps have been completed, then the Special Tax amount determined in Step 1 shall be increased Proportionately on each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax for Developed Property. Step 4: If additional monies are needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement after the first three steps have been completed, then the Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on each Assessor’s Parcel of Provisional Property up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax for Provisional Property; Notwithstanding the above, under no circumstances will the Special Tax levied in any Fiscal Year against any Assessor’s Parcel of Residential Property for which an occupancy permit for private residential use has been issued be increased as a result of a delinquency or default in the payment of the Special Tax applicable to any other Assessor’s Parcel within IA1 by more than ten percent (10%) above what would have been levied in the absence of such delinquencies or defaults. 5. EXEMPTIONS The CFD Administrator shall classify as Exempt Property (i) Assessor’s Parcels of Public Property, (ii) Assessor’s Parcels of Property Owner Association Property, (iii) Assessor’s Parcels which are used as places of worship and are exempt from ad valorem property taxes because they are owned by a religious organization, and (iv) Assessor’s Parcels with public or utility easements making impractical their utilization for other than the purposes set forth in the easement, provided that no such classification would reduce the sum of all Taxable Property in IA1 to less than 9.53 Acres for Zone A, 12.67 Acres for Zone B, or 17.09 Acres for Zone C. Assessor’s Parcels which cannot be classified as Exempt Property because such classification would reduce the sum of all Taxable Property in IA1 to less than 9.53 Acres for Zone A, 12.67 Acres for Zone B, or 17.09 Acres for Zone C, shall be classified as Provisional Property and will continue to be subject to the IA1 Special Taxes accordingly. Tax exempt status for the purpose of this paragraph will be assigned by the CFD Administrator in the chronological order in which property becomes eligible for classification as Exempt Property. If the use of an Assessor’s Parcel of Exempt Property changes so that such Assessor’s Parcel is no longer classified as one of the uses set forth in the first paragraph of Section 5 above that would make such Assessor’s Parcel eligible to be classified as Exempt Property, such Assessor’s Parcel shall cease to be classified as Exempt Property and shall be deemed to be Taxable Property. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 107 Page 23 6. APPEALS Any landowner who pays the Special Tax and claims the amount of the Special Tax levied on his or her Assessor’s Parcel is in error shall first consult with the CFD Administrator regarding such error not later than thirty-six (36) months after first having paid the first installment of the Special Tax that is disputed. If following such consultation the CFD Administrator determines that an error has occurred, then the CFD Administrator shall take any of the following actions, in order of priority, in order to correct the error: (i) Amend the Special Tax levy on the landowner’s Assessor’s Parcel(s) for the current Fiscal Year prior to the payment date, (ii) Require the CFD to reimburse the landowner for the amount of the overpayment to the extent of available CFD funds, or (iii) Grant a credit against, eliminate or reduce the future Special Taxes on the landowner’s Assessor’s Parcel(s) in the amount of the overpayment. If following such consultation and action by the CFD Administrator the landowner believes such error still exists, such person may file a written notice of appeal with the City Council. Upon the receipt of such notice, the City Council or designee may establish such procedures as deemed necessary to undertake the review of any such appeal. If the City Council or designee determines an error still exists, the CFD Administrator shall take any of the actions described as (i), (ii) and (iii) above, in order of priority, in order to correct the error. The City Council or designee thereof shall interpret this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax for purposes of clarifying any ambiguities and make determinations relative to the administration of the Special Tax and any landowner appeals. The decision of the City Council or designee shall be final and binding as to all persons. 7. COLLECTION OF SPECIAL TAXES Collection of the Annual Special Tax shall be made by the County in the same manner as ordinary ad valorem property taxes are collected and the Annual Special Tax shall be subject to the same penalties and the same lien priority in the case of delinquency as ad valorem taxes; provided, however, that the City Council may provide for (i) other means of collecting the Special Tax, including direct billings thereof to the property owners; and (ii) judicial foreclosure of delinquent Annual Special Taxes. 8. PREPAYMENT OF SPECIAL TAX OBLIGATION A. Prepayment in Full Property owners may prepay and permanently satisfy the Special Tax Obligation by a cash settlement with the City as permitted under Government Code Section 53344. The following definitions apply to this Section 8: 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 108 Page 24 “CFD Public Facilities Costs” means $12,550,000 or such lower number as (i) shall be determined by the CFD Administrator as sufficient to acquire or construct the facilities to be financed under the Act and financing program for IA1, or (ii) shall be determined by the City Council concurrently with a covenant that it will not issue any more Bonds (except refunding bonds). “Construction Fund” means the fund (regardless of its name) established pursuant to the Fiscal Agent Agreement to hold funds, which are currently available for expenditure to acquire or construct the facilities or pay fees authorized to be funded by CFD No. 16-I for IA1. “Future Facilities Costs” means the CFD Public Facilities Costs minus (i) costs previously paid from the Construction Fund to acquire or construct the facilities, (ii) monies currently on deposit in the Construction Fund, and (iii) monies currently on deposit in an escrow or other designated fund that are expected to be available to finance CFD Public Facilities Costs. “Outstanding Bonds” means all Previously Issued Bonds, which remain outstanding as of the first interest and/or principal payment date following the current Fiscal Year excluding Bonds to be redeemed at a later date with proceeds of prior Special Tax prepayments. “Previously Issued Bonds” means all Bonds that have been issued prior to the date of prepayment. The Special Tax Obligation applicable to an Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property, or Undeveloped Property for which a Building Permit has been issued may be prepaid and the obligation to pay the Special Tax for such Assessor’s Parcel permanently satisfied as described herein, provided that a prepayment may be made with respect to a particular Assessor’s Parcel only if there are no delinquent Special Taxes with respect to such Assessor’s Parcel at the time of prepayment. An owner of an Assessor’s Parcel eligible to prepay the Special Tax Obligation shall provide the CFD Administrator with written notice of intent to prepay, and designate or identify the company or agency that will be acting as the escrow agent, if any. The CFD Administrator shall provide the owner with a statement of the Prepayment Amount for such Assessor’s Parcel within thirty (30) days of the request, and may charge a reasonable fee for providing this service. Prepayment must be made at least 60 days prior to any redemption date for the Bonds to be redeemed with the proceeds of such prepaid Special Taxes, unless a shorter period is acceptable to the Fiscal Agent and the City. The Prepayment Amount (defined below) shall be calculated for each applicable Assessor’s Parcel or group of Assessor’s Parcels as summarized below (capitalized terms as defined below): Bond Redemption Amount plus Redemption Premium plus Future Facilities Prepayment Amount plus Defeasance Amount 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 109 Page 25 plus Prepayment Administrative Fees and Expenses less Reserve Fund Credit less Capitalized Interest Credit Total: equals Prepayment Amount As of the proposed date of prepayment, the Prepayment Amount (defined in Step 14 below) shall be calculated as follows: Step No.: 1. Confirm that no Special Tax delinquencies apply to such Assessor’s Parcel. 2. For Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property, determine the Maximum Special Tax. For Assessor’s Parcels of Undeveloped Property for which a Building Permit has been issued, compute the Maximum Special Tax for that Assessor’s Parcel as though it was already designated as Developed Property, based upon the Building Permit which has already been issued for that Assessor’s Parcel. 3. Divide the Maximum Special Tax computed pursuant to paragraph 2 by the total expected Maximum Special Tax revenue for IA1 assuming all Building Permits have been issued (build-out) within IA1, excluding any Assessor’s Parcels for which the Special Tax Obligation has been previously prepaid. 4. Multiply the quotient computed pursuant to paragraph 3 by the Outstanding Bonds and round that number up to the nearest $5,000 increment to compute the amount of Outstanding Bonds to be retired and prepaid for all applicable Assessor’s Parcels (the “Bond Redemption Amount”). 5. Multiply the Bond Redemption Amount computed pursuant to paragraph 4 by the applicable redemption premium (expressed as a percentage), if any, on the Outstanding Bonds to be redeemed at the first available call date (the “Redemption Premium”). 6. Compute the Future Facilities Costs. 7. Multiply the quotient computed pursuant to paragraph 3 by the amount determined pursuant to paragraph 6 to compute the amount of Future Facilities Costs to be prepaid (the “Future Facilities Prepayment Amount”). 8. Compute the amount needed to pay interest on the Bond Redemption Amount from the first bond interest and/or principal payment date following the current Fiscal Year until the expected redemption date for the Outstanding Bonds which, depending on the Fiscal Agent Agreement, may be as early as the next interest payment date. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 110 Page 26 9. Compute the amount the CFD Administrator reasonably expects to derive from the reinvestment of the Prepayment Amount less the Future Facilities Prepayment Amount and the Prepayment Administrative Fees from the date of prepayment until the redemption date for the Outstanding Bonds to be redeemed with the prepayment. 10. Subtract the amount computed in paragraph 9 from the amount computed in paragraph 8 (the “Defeasance Amount”). 11. Calculate the administrative fees and expenses of CFD No. 16-I for IA1, including the costs of computation of the prepayment, the costs to invest the prepayment proceeds, the costs of redeeming the Outstanding Bonds to be redeemed with the prepayment, and the costs of recording any notices to evidence the prepayment and the redemption (the “Prepayment Administrative Fees”). 12. If reserve funds for the Outstanding Bonds, if any, are at or above 100% of the reserve requirement (as defined in the Fiscal Agent Agreement) on the prepayment calculation date, a reserve fund credit shall be calculated as a reduction in the applicable reserve fund for the Outstanding Bonds to be redeemed pursuant to the prepayment (the “Reserve Fund Credit”). No Reserve Fund Credit shall be granted if, after the Prepayment Amount is calculated, reserve funds are below 100% of the reserve requirement after taking into account such prepayment. 13. If any capitalized interest for the Outstanding Bonds will not have been expended at the time of the first interest and/or principal payment following the current Fiscal Year, a capitalized interest credit shall be calculated by multiplying the quotient computed pursuant to paragraph 3 by the expected balance in the capitalized interest fund after such first interest and/or principal payment (the “Capitalized Interest Credit”). 14. The amount to prepay the Special Tax Obligation is equal to the sum of the amounts computed pursuant to paragraphs 4, 5, 7, 10, and 11, less the amounts computed pursuant to paragraphs 12 and 13 (the “Prepayment Amount”). 15. From the Prepayment Amount, the sum of the amounts computed pursuant to paragraphs 4, 5, and 10, less the amounts computed pursuant to paragraphs 12 and 13 shall be deposited into the appropriate fund as established under the Fiscal Agent Agreement and be used to retire Outstanding Bonds or make Debt Service payments. The amount computed pursuant to paragraph 7 shall be 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 111 Page 27 deposited into the Construction Fund. The amount computed pursuant to paragraph 11 shall be retained by CFD No. 16-I. The Prepayment Amount may be sufficient to redeem an amount other than a $5,000 increment of Bonds. In such cases, the increment above $5,000 or integral multiple thereof will be retained in the appropriate fund established under the Fiscal Agent Agreement to redeem Bonds to be used with the next prepayment of Bonds. The CFD Administrator will confirm that all previously levied Special Taxes have been paid in full. With respect to any Assessor's Parcel for which the Special Tax Obligation is prepaid in full, once the CFD Administrator has confirmed that all previously levied Special Taxes have been paid, the City Council shall cause a suitable notice to be recorded in compliance with the Act, to indicate the prepayment of the Special Tax Obligation and the release of the Special Tax lien on such Assessor’s Parcel, and the obligation of the owner of such Assessor's Parcel to pay the Special Tax shall cease. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no Special Tax prepayment shall be allowed unless the aggregate amount of Maximum Special Taxes less the Administrative Expense Requirement that may be levied on Taxable Property, respectively, after the proposed prepayment is at least 1.1 times the Debt Service on all Outstanding Bonds in each Fiscal Year. B. Partial Prepayment The Special Tax on an Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property or Undeveloped Property for which a Building Permit has been issued may be partially prepaid. The amount of the prepayment shall be calculated as in Section 8.A.; except that a partial prepayment shall be calculated according to the following formula: PP = (PE-A) x F+A These terms have the following meaning: PP = the partial prepayment PE = the Prepayment Amount calculated according to Section 8.A F = the percentage by which the owner of the Assessor’s Parcel(s) is partially prepaying the Special Tax Obligation A = the Prepayment Administrative Fees and Expenses from Section 8.A The owner of any Assessor’s Parcel who desires such partial prepayment shall notify the CFD Administrator of (i) such owner’s intent to partially prepay the Special Tax Obligation, (ii) the percentage by which the Special Tax Obligation shall be prepaid, and (iii) the company or agency that will be acting as the escrow agent, if any. The CFD Administrator shall provide the owner with a statement of the amount required for the partial prepayment of the Special Tax Obligation for an Assessor’s Parcel within sixty (60) days of the request and may charge a reasonable fee for providing this service. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 112 Page 28 With respect to any Assessor’s Parcel that is partially prepaid, the City shall (i) distribute the funds remitted to it according to Section 8.A., and (ii) indicate in the records of CFD No. 16-I for IA1 that there has been a partial prepayment of the Special Tax Obligation and that a portion of the Special Tax with respect to such Assessor’s Parcel, equal to the outstanding percentage (1.00 - F) of the Maximum Special Tax, shall continue to be levied on such Assessor’s Parcel. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no partial prepayment shall be allowed unless the aggregate amount of Maximum Special Taxes less the Administrative Expense Requirement that may be levied on Taxable Property, respectively, after the proposed partial prepayment is at least 1.1 times the Debt Service on all Outstanding Bonds in each Fiscal Year. 9. TERM OF SPECIAL TAX The Special Tax shall be levied as long as necessary to meet the Special Tax Requirement for a period not to exceed forty (40) Fiscal Years commencing with Fiscal Year 2016-17. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 113 Page 29 EXHIBIT C-A See Exhibit A Above 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 114 Page 30 EXHIBIT C-B CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND CFD NO. 16-I CERTIFICATE 1. Pursuant to Section 3F of the Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax (the “RMA”), the City of Chula Vista (the “City”) and Community Facilities District No. 16-I of the City of Chula Vista (“CFD No. 16-I”) hereby agree to a reduction in the Special Tax for Developed Property, Undeveloped Property, and/or Provisional Property: (a) The information in the RMA relating to the Special Tax for Developed Property, Undeveloped Property, and Provisional Property shall be modified as follows: [insert Table 1, 2, and/or 3 showing revised Assigned Special Tax rates for Developed Property, insert revised Backup Special Tax rates for Developed Property by Zone, and insert change to Maximum Special Tax rates for Undeveloped Property and Provisional Property by Zone] (b) The CFD Public Facilities Costs in Section 8 shall be changed to $____________. 2. Special Tax rates for Taxable Property may only be modified prior to the issuance of Bonds. 3. Upon execution of the Certificate by the City and CFD No. 16-I the City shall cause an amended Notice of Special Tax Lien for IA1 to be recorded reflecting the modifications set forth herein. By execution hereof, the undersigned acknowledges, on behalf of the City of Chula Vista and CFD No. 16-I, receipt of this Certificate and modification of the RMA as set forth in this Certificate. CITY OF CHULA VISTA By: Date: CFD Administrator COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 16-I OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA By: Date: 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 115 Page 31 EXHIBIT D Rate and Method of Apportionment Improvement Area No. 2 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 116 Page 32 RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX CITY OF CHULA VISTA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 16-I (MILLENIA) IMPROVEMENT AREA NO. 2 A Special Tax shall be levied on all Taxable Property within the boundaries of Improvement Area No. 1 of Community Facilities District No. 16-I (Millenia) of the City of Chula Vista (“IA2”) and collected each Fiscal Year commencing in Fiscal Year 2016-17, in an amount determined by the CFD Administrator through the application of the procedures described below. All of the real property within IA2, unless exempted by law or by the provisions hereof, shall be taxed for the purposes, to the extent, and in the manner herein provided. 1. DEFINITIONS The terms hereinafter set forth have the following meanings: “Acre” or “Acreage” means the land area of an Assessor’s Parcel as shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map, or if the land area is not shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map, the land area shown on the applicable Final Map. An Acre means 43,560 square feet of land. If the preceding maps for a land area are not available, the Acreage of such land area shall be determined by the City Engineer. “Act” means the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, being Chapter 2.5 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California. “Administrative Expense Requirement” means an annual amount equal to $75,000, or such lesser amount as may be designated by written instruction from an authorized representative of the City to the Fiscal Agent, to be allocated as the first priority of Special Taxes received each Fiscal Year for the payment of Administrative Expenses. “Administrative Expenses” means the following actual or reasonably estimated costs related to the administration of IA2 including, but not limited to: the costs of preparing and computing the Annual Special Tax (whether by the City or designee thereof or both); the costs of collecting the Special Taxes (whether by the City, the County or otherwise); the costs of remitting the Special Taxes to the Fiscal Agent; the costs of the Fiscal Agent (including its legal counsel) in the discharge of the duties required of it under the Fiscal Agent Agreement; the costs to the City, CFD No. 16-I, or any designee thereof complying with arbitrage rebate requirements, including without limitation rebate liability costs and periodic rebate calculations; the costs to the City, CFD No. 16- I, or any designee thereof complying with disclosure or reporting requirements of the City or CFD No. 16-I, associated with applicable federal and State laws; the costs associated with preparing Special Tax disclosure statements and responding to public inquiries regarding the Special Taxes; the costs to the City, CFD No. 16-I, or any designee thereof related to an appeal of the Special Tax; and the City’s annual administration fees and third party expenses. Administrative Expenses shall also include amounts estimated or advanced by the City or CFD No. 16-I for any other administrative purposes of CFD No. 16-I, including attorney’s fees and other costs related to commencing and pursuing any foreclosure of delinquent Special Taxes. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 117 Page 33 “Annual Special Tax” means the Special Tax actually levied in any Fiscal Year on any Assessor’s Parcel. “Assessor” means the Assessor of the County of San Diego. “Assessor's Parcel” means a lot or parcel shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map with an assigned Assessor's Parcel Number. “Assessor's Parcel Map” means an official map of the Assessor designating parcels by Assessor’s Parcel Number. “Assessor's Parcel Number” means the number assigned to an Assessor's Parcel by the County for purposes of identification. “Assigned Special Tax” means the Special Tax of that name described in Section 3.A below. “Backup Special Tax” means the Special Tax of that name described in Section 3.B below. “Bonds” means any bonds or other debt of CFD No. 16-I issued or incurred for IA2, whether in one or more series, secured by the levy of Special Taxes. “Building Permit” means a building permit for construction of a Residential Unit or non- residential structure within IA2 issued by the City. “Building Square Footage” means all of the square footage of living area within the perimeter of a residential structure, not including any carport, walkway, garage, overhang, or similar area. The determination of Building Square Footage shall be made by the CFD Administrator by reference to the Building Permit(s) issued for such Assessor’s Parcel and/or by reference to appropriate records kept by the City. Building Square Footage for a Residential Unit will be based on the Building Permit(s) issued for such Residential Unit prior to it being classified as Occupied Residential Property, and shall not change as a result of additions or modifications made to such Residential Unit after such classification as Occupied Residential Property. “Calendar Year” means the period commencing January 1 of any year and ending the following December 31. “CFD Administrator” means an authorized representative of the City, or designee thereof, responsible for determining the Special Tax Requirement, for preparing the Annual Special Tax roll and/or calculating the Backup Special Tax. “CFD No. 16-I” means the Community Facilities District No. 16-I (Millenia) of the City of Chula Vista. “City” means the City of Chula Vista, California. “City Council” means the City Council of the City acting as the legislative body of CFD No. 16- I under the Act. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 118 Page 34 "Condominium" means a unit, whether attached or detached, meeting the statutory definition of a condominium contained in the California Civil Code Section 4285. “County” means the County of San Diego, California. “Debt Service” means for each Fiscal Year, the total amount of principal and interest payable on any Outstanding Bonds during the Calendar Year commencing on January 1 of such Fiscal Year. “Developed Property” means for each Fiscal Year, all Taxable Property, exclusive of Provisional Property, for which a Building Permit was issued prior to March 1 of the previous Fiscal Year. An Assessor’s Parcel classified as Developed Property but for which the Building Permit that caused such Assessor’s Parcel to be classified as Developed Property has been cancelled and/or voided prior to the Fiscal Year for which Special Taxes are being levied shall be reclassified as Undeveloped Property, provided that the levy of the Annual Special Tax after such reclassification shall not be less than 1.1 times the annual Debt Service less Administrative Expenses on all Outstanding Bonds. If Bonds have not been issued, an Assessor’s Parcel classified as Developed Property for which such a Building Permit has been cancelled and/or voided shall be reclassified as Undeveloped Property. “Development Agreement” means that certain Development Agreement by and between the City of Chula Vista and McMillin Otay Ranch LLC adopted October 6, 2009 and recorded with the County of San Diego’s Recorder’s office on October 27, 2009 as Document Number 2009- 0595116, as may be amended and/or supplemented from time to time. “Exempt Property” means for each Fiscal Year, all Assessor’s Parcels designated as being exempt from Special Taxes pursuant to Section 5 below. “Final Map” means a subdivision of property by recordation of a final map, parcel map, or lot line adjustment, pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act (California Government Code Section 66410 et seq.) or recordation of a condominium plan pursuant to California Civil Code 4285 that creates individual lots for which Building Permits may be issued without further subdivision. “Fiscal Year” means the period starting on July 1 and ending the following June 30. “Fiscal Agent” means the fiscal agent, trustee, or paying agent under the Fiscal Agent Agreement. “Fiscal Agent Agreement” means the fiscal agent agreement, indenture, resolution or other instrument pursuant to which Bonds are issued, as modified, amended and/or supplemented from time to time, and any instrument replacing or supplementing the same. “IA2” means Improvement Area No. 2 of CFD No. 16-I. “Land Use Class” means any of the classes listed in Table 1or 2 under Section 3A below. Note: Land Uses Class is not in reference to a property’s zoning designation. “Lot(s)” means an individual legal lot created by a Final Map for which a building permit for residential construction has been or could be issued. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the case of 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 119 Page 35 an individual legal lot created by such a Final Map upon which Condominiums are entitled to be developed, the number of Lots allocable to such legal lot for purposes of calculating the Backup Special Tax applicable to such Final Map shall equal the number of Condominiums which are permitted to be constructed on such legal lot as shown on such Final Map. “Master Developer” means SLF IV-Millenia, LLC or its successors or assignees as defined in the Development Agreement. “Maximum Special Tax” means for each Assessor’s Parcel, the maximum Special Tax, determined in accordance with Sections 3.C and 3.D below, which may be levied in a given Fiscal Year on such Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property. “Non-Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property for which a Building Permit has been issued for the purpose of constructing one or more non-residential units or structures. “Occupied Residential Property” means all Assessor Parcels of Residential Property for which title is held by an end user (homeowner). “Outstanding Bonds” means all Bonds which are deemed to be outstanding under the Fiscal Agent Agreement. “Prepayment Amount” means the amount required to prepay the Special Tax Obligation in full for an Assessor’s Parcel as described in Section 8.A below. “Property Owner Association Property” means any Assessor’s Parcel within the boundaries of IA2 owned in fee by a property owner association, including any master or sub-association. “Proportionately” or “Proportionate” means for Developed Property, that the ratio of the actual Special Tax levy to the applicable Assigned Special Tax or Backup Special Tax is equal for all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property. For Undeveloped Property, "Proportionately" means that the ratio of the actual Special Tax levy per Acre to the Maximum Special Tax per Acre is equal for all Assessor's Parcels of Undeveloped Property. “Proportionately” may similarly be applied to other categories of Taxable Property as listed in Section 3 below. “Provisional Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Public Property, Property Owner Association Property or property that would otherwise be classified as Exempt Property pursuant to the provisions of Section 5, but cannot be classified as Exempt Property because to do so would reduce the Acreage of all Taxable Property below the required minimum Acreage as set forth in Section 5. “Public Property” means any property within the boundaries of IA2, which is owned by, or irrevocably offered for dedication to the federal government, the State of California, the County, the City or any other public agency; provided however that any property owned by a public agency and leased to a private entity and subject to taxation under Section 53340.1 of the Act shall be taxed and classified in accordance with its use. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 120 Page 36 “Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property for which a Building Permit has been issued for the purpose of constructing one or more Residential Units. “Residential Unit” means each separate residential dwelling unit that comprises an independent facility capable of conveyance or rental, separate from adjacent residential dwelling units. “Special Tax” means any special tax levied within IA2 pursuant to the Act and this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax. “Special Tax Obligation” means the total obligation of an Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property to pay the Special Tax for the remaining life of IA2. “Special Tax Requirement” means that amount required in any Fiscal Year to: (i) pay regularly scheduled Debt Service on all Outstanding Bonds; (ii) pay periodic costs on the Outstanding Bonds, including but not limited to, credit enhancement and rebate payments on the Outstanding Bonds; (iii) pay Administrative Expenses; (iv) pay any amounts required to establish or replenish any reserve funds for all Outstanding Bonds; (v) accumulate funds to pay directly for acquisition or construction of facilities provided that the inclusion of such amount does not cause an increase in the Special Tax to be levied on Undeveloped Property; and (vi) pay for reasonably anticipated delinquent Special Taxes based on (a) the average delinquency rate for special taxes levied in the previous Fiscal Year in all community facilities districts within the portion of the City commonly known as Otay Ranch for the first Fiscal Year in which Special Taxes are levied and (b) the delinquency rate for Special Taxes levied in the previous Fiscal Year within IA2 for all subsequent Fiscal Years in which Special Taxes are levied; less (vii) a credit for funds available to reduce the Annual Special Tax levy, as determined by the CFD Administrator pursuant to the Fiscal Agent Agreement. “State” means the State of California. “Taxable Property” means all of the Assessor's Parcels within the boundaries of CFD, which are not exempt from the levy of the Special Tax pursuant to law or Section 5 below. “Undeveloped Property” means, for each Fiscal Year, all Taxable Property not classified as Developed Property or Provisional Property. “Zone A” means the specific geographic area designated as such within IA2 and as depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto. “Zone B” means the specific geographic area designated as such within IA2 and as depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto. 2. LAND USE CLASSIFICATION Each Fiscal Year, beginning with Fiscal Year 2016-17, each Assessor’s Parcel within IA2 shall be classified as Taxable Property or Exempt Property. In addition, all Taxable Property shall further be classified as Developed Property, Undeveloped Property or Provisional Property, and all such Taxable Property shall be subject to the levy of Special Taxes in accordance with this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax determined pursuant to Sections 3 and 4 below. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 121 Page 37 Furthermore, each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property shall be classified according to its applicable Land Use Class based on its Building Square Footage. For Assessor’s Parcels of Non-Residential Property developed with Condominiums (e.g., office or industrial condos), the Acreage applicable to each such Condominium for purposes of levying Special Taxes shall be computed from the Acreage of the legal lot created by the Final Map upon which such Condominiums are entitled to be developed, with the Acreage of such lot allocated to each Condominium on a pro-rata basis using the building square footage of such Condominium relative to the total building square footage of all Condominiums entitled to be developed on such lot. The determination of building square footage for each non-residential Condominium shall be made by reference to the applicable Building Permit, and to the extent a Building Permit has not been issued for all Condominiums to be located on the applicable legal lot, the building square footage attributable to any such Condominiums shall be determined from the recorded condominium plan, or applicable site plan, plot plan, or other appropriate records kept by the City as reasonably determined by the CFD Administrator. In the event the City takes ownership of a Condominium within IA2 and such property in all other respects meets the definition of Public Property as set forth in Section 1, such property shall be exempt from Special Taxes pursuant to Section 5. 3. SPECIAL TAX RATES A. Assigned Special Tax for Developed Property The Assigned Special Tax applicable to an Assessor’s Parcel classified as Developed Property commencing Fiscal Year 2016-17 shall be determined pursuant to Table 1 or 2 below, as applicable. Table 1 Assigned Special Tax Rates for Developed Property within Zone A Land Land Use Type Building Square Footage Assigned Special Tax Use Class 1 Residential Property ≤ 1,450 $1,360 per Residential Unit 2 Residential Property >1,450 $1,628 per Residential Unit 3 Non-Residential Property N/A $6,000 per Acre 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 122 Page 38 Table 2 Assigned Special Tax Rates for Developed Property within Zone B Land Land Use Type Building Square Footage Assigned Special Tax Use Class 1 Residential Property ≤ 1,450 $1,360 per Residential Unit 2 Residential Property >1,450 $1,628 per Residential Unit 3 Non-Residential Property N/A $6,000 per Acre On each July 1, commencing July 1, 2017, the Assigned Special Tax for Developed Property shall be increased by two percent (2.00%) of the amount in effect in the prior Fiscal Year. B. Backup Special Tax for Developed Property When a Final Map or a condominium plan is recorded within Zone A or Zone B the Backup Special Tax for Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property classified as Residential Property shall be determined as follows: For each Assessor’s Parcel of Residential Property or for each Assessor’s Parcel of Undeveloped Property to be classified as Residential Property upon its development within the Final Map area, the Backup Special Tax for Fiscal Year 2016-17 shall be the rate per Lot calculated according to the following formula: Zone A $46,358 x A B = ------------------------ L Zone B $6,316 x A B = ------------------------ L 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 123 Page 39 The terms have the following meanings: B = Backup Special Tax per Lot A = Acreage classified or to be classified as Residential Property in such Final Map. The land area applicable to a Condominium shall be computed from the Acreage of the Lot on which the Condominium is located, with the Acreage for such Lot allocated equally among all of the Condominiums located or to be located on such Lot. L = For a Final Map, the number of Lots which are classified or to be classified as Residential Property. For each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property classified as Non-Residential Property or for each Assessor’s Parcel of Undeveloped Property to be classified as Non-Residential Property within the Final Map area, the Backup Special Tax for Fiscal Year 2016-17 shall be determined by multiplying $46,358 for Zone A and $6,316 for Zone B by the total Acreage of any such Assessor’s Parcel. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if Assessor’s Parcels of Residential Property, Non- Residential Property or Undeveloped Property for which the Backup Special Tax has been determined are subsequently changed or modified by recordation of a new or amended Final Map, then the Backup Special Tax applicable to such Assessor’s Parcels shall be recalculated to equal the total amount of Backup Special Tax that would have been generated if such change did not take place. On each July 1, commencing July 1, 2017, the Backup Special Tax applicable to each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property shall be increased by two percent (2.00%) of the amount in effect in the prior Fiscal Year. C. Maximum Special Tax for Developed Property Each Fiscal Year, the Maximum Special Tax for an Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property shall be the greater of the applicable Assigned Special Tax or Backup Special Tax. D. Maximum Special Tax for Provisional Property and Undeveloped Property The Maximum Special Tax for Provisional Property and Undeveloped Property commencing in Fiscal Year 2016-17 shall be $46,358 per Acre for Zone A and $6,316 per Acre for Zone B. On each July 1, commencing July 1, 2017, the Maximum Special Tax for Provisional Property and Undeveloped Property shall be increased by two percent (2.00%) of the amount in effect in the prior Fiscal Year. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 124 Page 40 E. Multiple Land Use Classes In some instances an Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property may contain more than one Land Use Class. The Maximum Special Tax that may be levied on such an Assessor’s Parcel shall only be levied on the Residential Property Land Use Class located on such Assessor’s Parcel. F. Administrative Special Tax Reduction Prior to the issuance of Bonds, the Assigned Special Tax, Backup Special Tax, and Maximum Special Tax (collectively the “Special Tax Rates”) on Taxable Property may be reduced in accordance with, and subject to the conditions set forth in this paragraph. Upon the City’s receipt of a written request from Master Developer and the CFD Administrator, the Special Tax Rates on Taxable Property may be reduced to a level which will provide not less than the sum of estimated Administrative Expense Requirement and one hundred ten percent (110%) of the estimated debt service with respect to the amount of Bonds requested to be issued in such written request. If it is reasonably determined by the CFD Administrator that the total effective tax rate on Residential Property, as determined in accordance with the Development Agreement, exceeds the maximum level allowed in the Development Agreement, the Special Tax Rates may be reduced to the amount necessary to satisfy the maximum allowable effective tax rate requirement on Residential Property with the written consent of Master Developer, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, and the CFD Administrator. It shall not be required that reductions among each “Building Square Footage” range of Residential Property be proportional. Additionally, the “CFD Public Facilities Costs” amount in Section 8 shall be reduced commensurate with any reductions to the Special Tax Rates pursuant to this paragraph, as reasonably determined by the CFD Administrator. A certificate in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit “B” shall be used for purposes of evidencing the required written consent and effectuating the reduction to the Special Tax Rates. The reductions permitted pursuant to this paragraph shall be reflected in an amended Notice of Special Tax Lien which the City shall cause to be recorded. 4. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT For each Fiscal Year, commencing Fiscal Year 2016-17, the CFD Administrator shall levy the Special Tax on all Taxable Property in accordance with the following steps: Step 1: The Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property at up to 100% of the applicable Assigned Special Tax to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement; Step 2: If additional monies are needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement after Step 1 has been completed, the Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on each Assessor's Parcel of Undeveloped Property up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax for Undeveloped Property; 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 125 Page 41 Step 3: If additional monies are needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement after the first two steps have been completed, then the Special Tax amount determined in Step 1 shall be increased Proportionately on each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax for Developed Property. Step 4: If additional monies are needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement after the first three steps have been completed, then the Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on each Assessor’s Parcel of Provisional Property up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax for Provisional Property; Notwithstanding the above, under no circumstances will the Special Tax levied in any Fiscal Year against any Assessor’s Parcel of Residential Property for which an occupancy permit for private residential use has been issued be increased as a result of a delinquency or default in the payment of the Special Tax applicable to any other Assessor’s Parcel within IA2 by more than ten percent (10%) above what would have been levied in the absence of such delinquencies or defaults. 5. EXEMPTIONS The CFD Administrator shall classify as Exempt Property (i) Assessor’s Parcels of Public Property, (ii) Assessor’s Parcels of Property Owner Association Property, (iii) Assessor’s Parcels which are used as places of worship and are exempt from ad valorem property taxes because they are owned by a religious organization, and (iv) Assessor’s Parcels with public or utility easements making impractical their utilization for other than the purposes set forth in the easement, provided that no such classification would reduce the sum of all Taxable Property in IA2 to less than 14.89 Acres for Zone A or 7.92 Acres for Zone B. Assessor’s Parcels which cannot be classified as Exempt Property because such classification would reduce the sum of all Taxable Property in IA2 to less than 14.89 Acres for Zone A or 7.92 Acres for Zone B shall be classified as Provisional Property and will continue to be subject to the IA2 Special Taxes accordingly. Tax exempt status for the purpose of this paragraph will be assigned by the CFD Administrator in the chronological order in which property becomes eligible for classification as Exempt Property. If the use of an Assessor’s Parcel of Exempt Property changes so that such Assessor’s Parcel is no longer classified as one of the uses set forth in the first paragraph of Section 5 above that would make such Assessor’s Parcel eligible to be classified as Exempt Property, such Assessor’s Parcel shall cease to be classified as Exempt Property and shall be deemed to be Taxable Property. 6. APPEALS Any landowner who pays the Special Tax and claims the amount of the Special Tax levied on his or her Assessor’s Parcel is in error shall first consult with the CFD Administrator regarding such error not later than thirty-six (36) months after first having paid the first installment of the Special Tax that is disputed. If following such consultation the CFD Administrator determines that an error has occurred, then the CFD Administrator shall take any of the following actions, in order of priority, in order to correct the error: (iv) Amend the Special Tax levy on the landowner’s Assessor’s Parcel(s) for the current Fiscal Year prior to the payment date, 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 126 Page 42 (v) Require the CFD to reimburse the landowner for the amount of the overpayment to the extent of available CFD funds, or (vi) Grant a credit against, eliminate or reduce the future Special Taxes on the landowner’s Assessor’s Parcel(s) in the amount of the overpayment. If following such consultation and action by the CFD Administrator the landowner believes such error still exists, such person may file a written notice of appeal with the City Council. Upon the receipt of such notice, the City Council or designee may establish such procedures as deemed necessary to undertake the review of any such appeal. If the City Council or designee determines an error still exists, the CFD Administrator shall take any of the actions described as (i), (ii) and (iii) above, in order of priority, in order to correct the error. The City Council or designee thereof shall interpret this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax for purposes of clarifying any ambiguities and make determinations relative to the administration of the Special Tax and any landowner appeals. The decision of the City Council or designee shall be final and binding as to all persons. 7. COLLECTION OF SPECIAL TAXES Collection of the Annual Special Tax shall be made by the County in the same manner as ordinary ad valorem property taxes are collected and the Annual Special Tax shall be subject to the same penalties and the same lien priority in the case of delinquency as ad valorem taxes; provided, however, that the City Council may provide for (i) other means of collecting the Special Tax, including direct billings thereof to the property owners; and (ii) judicial foreclosure of delinquent Annual Special Taxes. 8. PREPAYMENT OF SPECIAL TAX OBLIGATION C. Prepayment in Full Property owners may prepay and permanently satisfy the Special Tax Obligation by a cash settlement with the City as permitted under Government Code Section 53344. The following definitions apply to this Section 8: “CFD Public Facilities Costs” means $12,900,000 or such lower number as (i) shall be determined by the CFD Administrator as sufficient to acquire or construct the facilities to be financed under the Act and financing program for IA2, or (ii) shall be determined by the City Council concurrently with a covenant that it will not issue any more Bonds (except refunding bonds). “Construction Fund” means the fund (regardless of its name) established pursuant to the Fiscal Agent Agreement to hold funds, which are currently available for expenditure to acquire or construct the facilities or pay fees authorized to be funded by CFD No. 16-I for IA2. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 127 Page 43 “Future Facilities Costs” means the CFD Public Facilities Costs minus (i) costs previously paid from the Construction Fund to acquire or construct the facilities, (ii) monies currently on deposit in the Construction Fund, and (iii) monies currently on deposit in an escrow or other designated fund that are expected to be available to finance CFD Public Facilities Costs. “Outstanding Bonds” means all Previously Issued Bonds, which remain outstanding as of the first interest and/or principal payment date following the current Fiscal Year excluding Bonds to be redeemed at a later date with proceeds of prior Special Tax prepayments. “Previously Issued Bonds” means all Bonds that have been issued prior to the date of prepayment. The Special Tax Obligation applicable to an Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property, or Undeveloped Property for which a Building Permit has been issued may be prepaid and the obligation to pay the Special Tax for such Assessor’s Parcel permanently satisfied as described herein, provided that a prepayment may be made with respect to a particular Assessor’s Parcel only if there are no delinquent Special Taxes with respect to such Assessor’s Parcel at the time of prepayment. An owner of an Assessor’s Parcel eligible to prepay the Special Tax Obligation shall provide the CFD Administrator with written notice of intent to prepay, and designate or identify the company or agency that will be acting as the escrow agent, if any. The CFD Administrator shall provide the owner with a statement of the Prepayment Amount for such Assessor’s Parcel within thirty (30) days of the request, and may charge a reasonable fee for providing this service. Prepayment must be made at least 60 days prior to any redemption date for the Bonds to be redeemed with the proceeds of such prepaid Special Taxes, unless a shorter period is acceptable to the Fiscal Agent and the City. The Prepayment Amount (defined below) shall be calculated for each applicable Assessor’s Parcel or group of Assessor’s Parcels as summarized below (capitalized terms as defined below): Bond Redemption Amount plus Redemption Premium plus Future Facilities Prepayment Amount plus Defeasance Amount plus Prepayment Administrative Fees and Expenses less Reserve Fund Credit less Capitalized Interest Credit Total: equals Prepayment Amount As of the proposed date of prepayment, the Prepayment Amount (defined in Step 14 below) shall be calculated as follows: Step No.: 16. Confirm that no Special Tax delinquencies apply to such Assessor’s Parcel. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 128 Page 44 17. For Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property, determine the Maximum Special Tax. For Assessor’s Parcels of Undeveloped Property for which a Building Permit has been issued, compute the Maximum Special Tax for that Assessor’s Parcel as though it was already designated as Developed Property, based upon the Building Permit which has already been issued for that Assessor’s Parcel. 18. Divide the Maximum Special Tax computed pursuant to paragraph 2 by the total expected Maximum Special Tax revenue for IA2 assuming all Building Permits have been issued (build-out) within IA2, excluding any Assessor’s Parcels for which the Special Tax Obligation has been previously prepaid. 19. Multiply the quotient computed pursuant to paragraph 3 by the Outstanding Bonds and round that number up to the nearest $5,000 increment to compute the amount of Outstanding Bonds to be retired and prepaid for all applicable Assessor’s Parcels (the “Bond Redemption Amount”). 20. Multiply the Bond Redemption Amount computed pursuant to paragraph 4 by the applicable redemption premium (expressed as a percentage), if any, on the Outstanding Bonds to be redeemed at the first available call date (the “Redemption Premium”). 21. Compute the Future Facilities Costs. 22. Multiply the quotient computed pursuant to paragraph 3 by the amount determined pursuant to paragraph 6 to compute the amount of Future Facilities Costs to be prepaid (the “Future Facilities Prepayment Amount”). 23. Compute the amount needed to pay interest on the Bond Redemption Amount from the first bond interest and/or principal payment date following the current Fiscal Year until the expected redemption date for the Outstanding Bonds which, depending on the Fiscal Agent Agreement, may be as early as the next interest payment date. 24. Compute the amount the CFD Administrator reasonably expects to derive from the reinvestment of the Prepayment Amount less the Future Facilities Prepayment Amount and the Prepayment Administrative Fees from the date of prepayment until the redemption date for the Outstanding Bonds to be redeemed with the prepayment. 25. Subtract the amount computed in paragraph 9 from the amount computed in paragraph 8 (the “Defeasance Amount”). 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 129 Page 45 26. Calculate the administrative fees and expenses of CFD No. 16-I for IA2, including the costs of computation of the prepayment, the costs to invest the prepayment proceeds, the costs of redeeming the Outstanding Bonds to be redeemed with the prepayment, and the costs of recording any notices to evidence the prepayment and the redemption (the “Prepayment Administrative Fees”). 27. If reserve funds for the Outstanding Bonds, if any, are at or above 100% of the reserve requirement (as defined in the Fiscal Agent Agreement) on the prepayment calculation date, a reserve fund credit shall be calculated as a reduction in the applicable reserve fund for the Outstanding Bonds to be redeemed pursuant to the prepayment (the “Reserve Fund Credit”). No Reserve Fund Credit shall be granted if, after the Prepayment Amount is calculated, reserve funds are below 100% of the reserve requirement after taking into account such prepayment. 28. If any capitalized interest for the Outstanding Bonds will not have been expended at the time of the first interest and/or principal payment following the current Fiscal Year, a capitalized interest credit shall be calculated by multiplying the quotient computed pursuant to paragraph 3 by the expected balance in the capitalized interest fund after such first interest and/or principal payment (the “Capitalized Interest Credit”). 29. The amount to prepay the Special Tax Obligation is equal to the sum of the amounts computed pursuant to paragraphs 4, 5, 7, 10, and 11, less the amounts computed pursuant to paragraphs 12 and 13 (the “Prepayment Amount”). 30. From the Prepayment Amount, the sum of the amounts computed pursuant to paragraphs 4, 5, and 10, less the amounts computed pursuant to paragraphs 12 and 13 shall be deposited into the appropriate fund as established under the Fiscal Agent Agreement and be used to retire Outstanding Bonds or make Debt Service payments. The amount computed pursuant to paragraph 7 shall be deposited into the Construction Fund. The amount computed pursuant to paragraph 11 shall be retained by CFD No. 16-I. The Prepayment Amount may be sufficient to redeem an amount other than a $5,000 increment of Bonds. In such cases, the increment above $5,000 or integral multiple thereof will be retained in the appropriate fund established under the Fiscal Agent Agreement to redeem Bonds to be used with the next prepayment of Bonds. The CFD Administrator will confirm that all previously levied Special Taxes have been paid in full. With respect to any Assessor's Parcel for which the Special Tax Obligation is 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 130 Page 46 prepaid in full, once the CFD Administrator has confirmed that all previously levied Special Taxes have been paid, the City Council shall cause a suitable notice to be recorded in compliance with the Act, to indicate the prepayment of the Special Tax Obligation and the release of the Special Tax lien on such Assessor’s Parcel, and the obligation of the owner of such Assessor's Parcel to pay the Special Tax shall cease. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no Special Tax prepayment shall be allowed unless the aggregate amount of Maximum Special Taxes less the Administrative Expense Requirement that may be levied on Taxable Property, respectively, after the proposed prepayment is at least 1.1 times the Debt Service on all Outstanding Bonds in each Fiscal Year. D. Partial Prepayment The Special Tax on an Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property or Undeveloped Property for which a Building Permit has been issued may be partially prepaid. The amount of the prepayment shall be calculated as in Section 8.A.; except that a partial prepayment shall be calculated according to the following formula: PP = (PE-A) x F+A These terms have the following meaning: PP = the partial prepayment PE = the Prepayment Amount calculated according to Section 8.A F = the percentage by which the owner of the Assessor’s Parcel(s) is partially prepaying the Special Tax Obligation A = the Prepayment Administrative Fees and Expenses from Section 8.A The owner of any Assessor’s Parcel who desires such partial prepayment shall notify the CFD Administrator of (i) such owner’s intent to partially prepay the Special Tax Obligation, (ii) the percentage by which the Special Tax Obligation shall be prepaid, and (iii) the company or agency that will be acting as the escrow agent, if any. The CFD Administrator shall provide the owner with a statement of the amount required for the partial prepayment of the Special Tax Obligation for an Assessor’s Parcel within sixty (60) days of the request and may charge a reasonable fee for providing this service. With respect to any Assessor’s Parcel that is partially prepaid, the City shall (i) distribute the funds remitted to it according to Section 8.A., and (ii) indicate in the records of CFD No. 16-I for IA2 that there has been a partial prepayment of the Special Tax Obligation and that a portion of the Special Tax with respect to such Assessor’s Parcel, equal to the outstanding percentage (1.00 - F) of the Maximum Special Tax, shall continue to be levied on such Assessor’s Parcel. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no partial prepayment shall be allowed unless the aggregate amount of Maximum Special Taxes less the Administrative Expense Requirement that may be levied on Taxable Property, respectively, after the proposed partial prepayment is at least 1.1 times the Debt Service on all Outstanding Bonds in each Fiscal Year. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 131 Page 47 9. TERM OF SPECIAL TAX The Special Tax shall be levied as long as necessary to meet the Special Tax Requirement for a period not to exceed forty (40) Fiscal Years commencing with Fiscal Year 2016-17. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 132 Page 48 EXHIBIT D-A See Exhibit A above 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 133 Page 49 EXHIBIT D-B CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND CFD NO. 16-I CERTIFICATE 4. Pursuant to Section 3F of the Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax (the “RMA”), the City of Chula Vista (the “City”) and Community Facilities District No. 16-I of the City of Chula Vista (“CFD No. 16-I”) hereby agree to a reduction in the Special Tax for Developed Property, Undeveloped Property, and/or Provisional Property: (c) The information in the RMA relating to the Special Tax for Developed Property, Undeveloped Property, and Provisional Property shall be modified as follows: [insert Table 1 and/or 2 showing revised Assigned Special Tax rates for Developed Property, insert revised Backup Special Tax rates for Developed Property by Zone, and insert change to Maximum Special Tax rates for Undeveloped Property and Provisional Property by Zone] (d) The CFD Public Facilities Costs in Section 8 shall be changed to $____________. 5. Special Tax rates for Taxable Property may only be modified prior to the issuance of Bonds. 6. Upon execution of the Certificate by the City and CFD No. 16-I the City shall cause an amended Notice of Special Tax Lien for IA2 to be recorded reflecting the modifications set forth herein. By execution hereof, the undersigned acknowledges, on behalf of the City of Chula Vista and CFD No. 16-I, receipt of this Certificate and modification of the RMA as set forth in this Certificate. CITY OF CHULA VISTA By: Date: CFD Administrator COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 16-I OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA By: Date: 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 134 60297.00049\29181494.3 1 ACQUISITION/FINANCING AGREEMENT COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 16-I (MILLENIA) THIS ACQUISITION/FINANCING AGREEMENT(the “Agreement”), dated as of _________ 1, 2016 (the “Effective Date”), is made and entered into by and between the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a charter city duly organized and validly existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of California, (the “City”), COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 16-I (MILLENIA), a community facilities district formed and existing pursuant to the laws of the State of California (the “CFD No. 16-I”), and SLF IV-MILLENIA, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “Owner”). WHEREAS, the City and McMillin Otay Ranch, LLC entered into that certain Development Agreement (the “Development Agreement”) for thepurposes and mutual benefits set forth therein to provide for the development of the Eastern Urban Center, now known and referred to as “Millenia” (the “Property”). The Owner has acquired the Property and has been assigned all rights, interests and obligations of the Development Agreement and existing entitlements and the obligations to construct improvements required by subdivision maps on the Property; and WHEREAS, the Owner is the master developer of the Property described in Exhibit F attached heretoand incorporated herein by this reference and Owner has obtained certain land use entitlements from the City which permit the development of the Property as entitled, (the “Development Project”); and WHEREAS, as a part of the development of the Development Project, the Owner has, or will be constructing certain public improvements to serve the Development Project including the improvements identified as Improvements Nos. __ through __ in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Improvements”) ; and WHEREAS, the City and Owner entered into that certain Community Facilities Agreement Advance Deposit and Reimbursement Agreement Community Facilities District No. 16-I (Millenia) dated December 30, 2015 (the “Deposit Agreement”) pursuant to which, among other things, (i) Owner has agreed to advance funds to the City for the payment of the City’s costs and expenses relating to the formation of CFD No.16-I and issuance of bonds of CFD No.16-I, (ii)the City and Owner identified certain “Initial Improvements” (as defined in the Deposit Agreement) that are eligible to be financed through CFD No.16-I subject to bidding and contracting requirements set forth in the Deposit Agreement, and (iii)the City and Owner identified the biddingand contracting requirements for all “Additional Improvements” (as defined in the Deposit Agreement) that are eligible to be financed through CFD No.16-I; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Development Agreement including, without limitation, the “Financing Plan” incorporated by reference as Exhibit C to the Development Agreement (the “Financing Plan”), the Owner requested that the City consider and the City did consider and form 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 135 60297.00049\29181494.3 2 CFD No. 16-I and designate Improvement Area Nos. 1 and 2 of CFD No.16-I (each, an “Improvement Area” and, together, the “Improvement Areas”), under the terms and conditions of the “Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982,” as amended (Government Code Section 53311 and following) (the “Act”), for the purpose of financing the acquisition or construction of the Improvements; and WHEREAS, Owner, in order to proceed in a timely way with development of the Development Project, desires to construct the Improvements that will, following the completion of the construction thereof, be acquired, owned, operated and/or maintained by the City; and WHEREAS, the City, CFD No. 16-I and Owner agree that the Improvements to be constructed by the Owner may, upon the completion of the construction thereof, be acquired by the City through financing provided by CFD No. 16-I at prices determined pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement; and WHEREAS, the City and the Owner further agree that payment by the City for the acquisition of the Improvements shall be funded solely from(a) the proceeds of bonds which shall be issued by CFD No. 16-I for each Improvement Area and which shall be secured by the levy of special taxes within the Improvement Area and (b) Surplus Special Taxes (defined below) derived from the levy of special taxes within the Improvement Areas; and WHEREAS, it is the intent of this Agreement that Owner shall be entitled pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement to be paid for each of the Improvements constructed by the Owner at the prices as determined by theCity pursuant to this Agreement upon: (a) the sale and delivery of bonds by CFD No. 16-I the proceeds of which shall be authorized and designated to make the payments to acquire such Improvements, or (b) the receipt of Surplus Special Taxes and (c) the completion of the construction of each such Improvement; and WHEREAS, the City and CFD No. 16-I are willing to have CFD No. 16-I finance the acquisition of the Improvements to be constructed by the Owner, subject to the requirements of the Act, the City of Chula Vista Statement of Goals and Policies Regarding the Establishment of Community Facilities Districts adopted by the City Council (the “Goals and Policies”), the Development Agreement and Financing Plan, the Deposit Agreement and this Agreement and Owner desires that CFD No. 16-I so finance the acquisition of such Improvements allocable to the Development Project. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED between the respective parties as follows: SECTION 1.Recitals. The above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2.Plans and Specifications. All plans, specifications and bid documents for the Improvements (the “Plans and Specifications”) and all changes in the Plans and Specifications necessitated by change orders shall be prepared by the Owner at the Owner’s initial expense, subject to City approval. The costs of acquisition of such Improvements shall include costs of 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 136 60297.00049\29181494.3 3 the preparation of the Plans and Specifications and all related documentation as set forth in Section 7 below. Owner shall not award bids for construction, commence construction or cause commencement of construction of any Improvement until the Plans and Specifications for such Improvement have been approved by the City. SECTION 3.Design, Bid and Construction of Improvements. With the exception of the Initial Improvements, Owner covenants and agrees that each Improvement to be acquired from Owner pursuant to this Agreement shall be designed, bid and constructed: (a)in substantial compliance with the approved Plans and Specifications for such Improvement; (b)in a good and workmanlike manner by well-trained adequately supervised workers; (c)in strict compliance with all governmental and quasi-governmental rules, regulations, laws, building codes and all requirements of Owner’s insurers and lenders; (d)free of any known design flaws and defects; and (e)except as provided below, in substantial compliance with the requirements of Exhibit C hereto which is incorporated herein by this reference. The Improvements identified as Improvement Nos.__ through __ in Exhibit A hereto are the Initial Improvements. Owner certified in the Deposit Agreement that Owner solicited bids for the construction of each of theInitial Improvements from not less than three (3) contractors and awarded the construction contract for each of the Initial Improvements to that contractor submitting the lowest responsible bid for such work, and Owner hereby certifies that the design andthe construction of each of the Initial Improvements was undertaken in conformity with (a) through (d) above in the preceding paragraph. The City has agreed in the Deposit Agreement to acquire the Initial Improvements notwithstanding the fact that such Initial Improvements may not have been bid and the award of the construction contracts may not have been made in accordance with all of the requirements of Exhibit C hereto. In the event of a protest by a bidder to the award of a contract for the construction of an Improvement or Improvements to the apparent low bidder, the Owner may, in its sole discretion, elect to: (a)award the contract to the apparent low bidder pursuant to the provisions of Exhibit C hereto if the Owner has determined that the bid ofthe apparent low bidder was, in fact, responsive and that the irregularity upon which the protest is based was minor in nature, i.e., the irregularity did not create an unfair competitive advantage for the apparent low bidder; 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 137 60297.00049\29181494.3 4 (b)reject the bid of the apparent low bidder if the Owner determines that the irregularity upon which the protest is based did create an unfair competitive advantage for the apparent low bidder and the bid of the apparent low bidder was, therefore, not responsive and award the contract to the lowest responsive bidder; or (c)reject all bids and solicit new bids for the construction of the applicable Improvement or Improvements. Should a legal action be filed challenging the validity of the Owner’s decision regarding any such bid protest and/or the award of any contract for the construction of any Improvement, including any Initial Improvement, the Owner shall, at Owner’s sole expense, defend such action and shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officers, directors, employees and agents and CFD No. 16-I, its officers, directors, employees and agents (each, an “Indemnified Party” and collectively, the “Indemnified Parties”). SECTION 4.Inspection and Acceptance of the Improvements. The construction activities relating to the Improvements to be constructed by the Owner shall be subject at all reasonable times to inspection by authorized representatives of City. Once an Improvement to be acquired by City is substantially completed in accordance with the approved Plans and Specifications, then such Improvement shall be eligible for payment of the Base Increment of the Purchase Price (as defined in Section 7 below) therefor. Prior to acceptance by the City of any Improvement constructed by the Owner for purposes of paying the Retained Increment (as defined in Section 7 below) of the Purchase Price, the Owner shall provide to the City Engineer of the City, or his or her designee (the “City Engineer”), the documentation set forth in this Section 4and Section 7(c)(ii) below and obtain approval of as-built drawings for the Improvement in accordance with the process described below in this Section 4. The engineer of record for any such Improvement (“Engineer of Record”) shall file form PW-E-106 (Request for Release of Bonds) with the City Engineer. Within 20 working days of such filing, the field inspector of the City or his or her designee (“Field Inspector”) shall issue and transmit to the Engineer of Record a letter requesting (i) as- built drawings and soils reports (when applicable) and (ii) a punchlist of work to be completed or corrections to work to be completed before such Improvement will be eligible for payment of the Retained Increment. Within 20 working days of receipt of the Field Inspector’s letter, the Engineer of Record shall prepare redline as-built drawings and submit them, together with any necessary soils reports, to the Field Inspector and the Owner shall complete the items of work and/or corrections specified in the punchlist. Within 10 working days of the Engineer of Record’s submittal of the red lined as-built drawings, the Field Inspector shall review such drawings and provide comments. The Engineer of Record shall revise the redline as-built drawings per the Field Inspector’s comments and resubmit within 10 working days. The Field Inspector shall make his final review within 5 working days of the Engineer of Record’s resubmittal and notify the Engineer of Record to prepare mylar as-built drawings and a microfiche copy and submit both to the City Engineer or his designee and notify the Owner of any punchlist items which remain to be completed. The City and Owner shall make best efforts 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 138 60297.00049\29181494.3 5 to perform within the time periods described above. The inability of City or Owner to perform within each time period, notwithstanding its best efforts, shall not constitute a breach of this Agreement. SECTION 5.Warranty of Improvements Constructed by the Owner. At all times prior to the City’s acceptance of any Improvement constructed by the Owner, the Owner shall be responsible for maintaining such Improvement at the Owner’s expense. The Owner shall be obligated for the period of twelve (12) months immediately following the City’s acceptance of such an Improvement to repair or replace, at Owner’s expense, any defects or failures resulting from the work of Owner, its contractors or agents. Upon the expiration of such twelve (12) month period, Owner shall assign to City and CFD No. 16-I its rights in and to any warranties, guarantees or other evidence of contingent obligations of third persons with respect to such Improvement. As a condition precedent to the payment of the Retained Increment (as defined in Section 7 below) of the Purchase Price, Owner shall post a maintenance bond in a form reasonably approved by the City, cause such a maintenance bond to be posted, or assign Owner’s rights under such a maintenance bond naming City and/or CFD No. 16-I as beneficiary in an amount equal to fifteen percent (15%) of the Purchase Price of such Improvement in order to secure Owner’s obligations pursuant to this Section. Upon posting of such maintenance bond, the City shall release any performance, labor and material bonds for such Improvement. SECTION 6.Notice of Completion and Lien Releases. Upon completion of the construction of an Improvement, Owner shall notify the City Engineer in writing of such completion and shall prepare and execute a Notice of Completion for such Improvement in the form prescribed by Section3093 of the California Civil Code and shall record such notice in the Official Records of the County of San Diego. Owner shall cause its contractors to provide unconditional lien releases for such Improvement in accordance with Section 3262 of the Civil Code. Notwithstanding the foregoing, City may waive the requirement for a Notice of Completion and lien releases if City determines that as of the date of payment of the Retained Increment of the Purchase Price for an Improvement, title to such Improvement or portion thereof satisfies the requirements for Acceptable Title (as hereinafter defined). SECTION 7.Payment of Purchase Price. (a)Amount of Purchase Price. The amount to be paid by City for the Improvements to be constructed by and acquired from Owner (the “Purchase Price”) shall, as to each such Improvement, (i) be determined by City in accordance with the provisions of this Section 7, (ii) equal the lesser of the cost or the value thereof, (iii) include the reasonable cost or value of eligible appurtenant public facilities, (iv) include the costs of the title insurance policy described in Section 9 (a), and (v) include all other costs of construction and incidental costs eligible under the Act, the Goals and Policies and the Financing Plan as a part of the cost of the Improvements. The costs of each Improvement to be included in the Purchase Price of such Improvement shall include the following: 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 139 60297.00049\29181494.3 6 (i)the actual hard costs for the construction of the Improvement, including labor, materials and equipment costs; (ii)the costs of grading related to the Improvement; (iii)the costs incurred in designing, engineering and preparing the plans and specifications for the Improvement; (iv)the costs of environmental evaluation and mitigation of or relating to the Improvement; (v)fees paid to governmental agencies for, and costs incurred in connection with, obtaining permits, licenses or other governmental approvals for the Improvement; (vi)costs of construction administration and supervision up to five percent (5.0%) of the total cost of the Improvement as an exception to the Goals and Policies which would otherwise impose a limitation of one and three-quarters percent (1.75%) of total cost; (vii)professional costs associated with the Improvement, such as engineering, legal, accounting, inspection, construction staking, materials and testing and similar professional services; (viii)costs of payment, performance and/or maintenance bonds and insurance costs directly related to the construction of the Improvement; and (ix)the value of the land that is included in each park Improvement, which shall be based upon the amount per gross acre used by the City in setting its park fees. In no event shall the cost or value of the construction of the Improvements, other than the Initial Improvements, be deemed to exceed the construction contract prices set forth in the contracts and change orders approved by City (“Approved Change Orders”) pursuant to the applicable provisions of Exhibit C hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference, or otherwise authorized pursuant to this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the aggregate Purchase Price of the acquisition of all new utilities to be owned by a public utility or public utilities may not exceed 5% of the proceeds of the series of the Bonds to be utilized to pay such Purchase Price less that portion of the reserve fund, costs of issuance and other incidental costs allocable to such amount. (b)Incremental Payment of Purchase Price of an Improvement.Except for payments for Discrete Components that are permitted pursuant to Section7(g) below, the Purchase Price for any Improvement constructed by the Owner shall be payable in not to exceed two increments: (i) the “Base Increment” which shall be an amount equal to 75% of the audited, eligible costs as reflected in the written request for payment of the Base Increment submitted by the Owner and as approved by the Director of Public Works and shall not exceed 75% of the cost estimate set forth 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 140 60297.00049\29181494.3 7 in Exhibit A for such Improvement; and (ii) the “Retained Increment” which shall be an amount not to exceed the remaining, unpaid portion of the Purchase Price for such Improvement determined pursuant to the provisions of (a) above. (c)Requisition for Incremental Payment of Purchase Priceof an Improvement. (i)Base Increment. The Owner may submit only one (1) written request to the City Engineer for the payment of the Base Increment for an Improvement constructed by the Owner upon the substantial completion of theconstruction of such Improvement in accordance with the approved Plans and Specifications. The criteria for determining “substantial completion” of each such Improvement is described in Exhibit B and shall mean generally that construction, or work with respect to such Improvement has progressed to the point where it is sufficiently complete so that such Improvement can be utilized for the purpose for which it was intended. Substantial completion of such an Improvement shall also mean that all components of such Improvement are substantially complete, e.g., in the case of Improvement including streets [(other than streets included in the Traffic Enhancement Improvements)], the components are described in footnote 1 to Exhibit A. Each Base Increment payment request must be in the form attached hereto as Exhibit D, which is incorporated herein by this reference, and conform to the requirements of (f) below. The request for payment of the Base Increment for an Improvement shall be accompanied by a copy of the following documents related to the construction of such Improvement: (1) each construction contract and copy of bid notice for such contract, (2) each change order, (3) each invoice submitted pursuant to such construction contracts, (4) evidence of payment of each such invoice such as copies of cancelled checks or other evidence of payment satisfactory to the City Engineer, and (5) written conditional lien releases executed by each applicable contractor, subcontractor and materialman in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney of the City (the “City Attorney”) for such Improvement. (ii)Retained Increment. The Owner may submit only one (1) written request to the City Engineer for the payment of the Retained Increment for an Improvement in the form attached hereto as Exhibit E, which is incorporated herein by this reference, upon the submission to the City Engineer of (1) as-built drawings or other equivalent plans and specifications for such Improvement in a form reasonably acceptable to the City, (2) evidence that the Owner has posted a maintenance bond for such Improvement as required by Section 5 hereinabove, (3) evidence of the satisfaction of the requirements of Section 10 hereinbelow directly related to such Improvement and (4) written unconditional lien releases from all contractors, subcontractors and materialmen satisfactory to the City Attorney for such Improvement. For any costs not included in the Owner’s written request for payment of the Base Increment but requested for payment in the Retained Increment the request shall conform to the requirements of (f) below and also be accompanied by the following documents related to such additional costs of the construction of such Improvement if not done so with the written requestfor payment of the Base Increment: (1) each construction contract, (2) each change order, (3) each invoice submitted pursuant to such construction contracts, and (4) evidence of payment of 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 141 60297.00049\29181494.3 8 each such invoice such as copies of cancelled checks or other evidence of payment satisfactory to the City Engineer. (d)Documentation. Any payment request submitted by Owner shall be properly executed and shall include copies of all supporting documents required by subsection (c)(i) or (c)(ii), as applicable. (e)Review of Payment Request for an Improvement. The City Engineer or his designee shall review each payment request and the supporting documentation accompanying such payment request. If the City Engineer finds that any such payment request is incomplete, improper or otherwise not suitable for approval, the City Engineer shall inform Owner in writing within twenty (20) working days after receipt thereof, the reasons for his finding. Owner shall have the right to respond to this finding by submitting further documentation after receipt of the denial. The City Engineer shall review any further documentation received from the Owner in support of a payment request and inform Owner of his approval or denial of the payment request as supplemented in accordance with this Section within ten (10) working days after receipt of the supplemental documentation. A resubmittal of a payment request shall be deemed a new payment request for purposes of this Section. Subject to the limitations set forth herein, costs incurredunder a construction contract for an Improvement entered into pursuant to the requirements of this Agreement and Approved Change Orders shall be deemed to be reasonable and, subject to the other provisions of this Agreement, shall be included in the Purchase Price for such Improvement. After his or her approval of each payment request, the City Engineer shall immediately forward a request to the Director of Finance of the City notifying the Director of Finance of his or her approval of the payment request and requesting that such payment be made to the appropriate payee. The Director of Finance shall process any such request of the City Engineer pursuant to the applicable procedures of the Finance Department and shall make or authorize such payment pursuant to such procedures and subsection (h) below. (f)Payment. (i) Priority of Payment of Purchase Prices for Improvements.The City and the Owner acknowledge and agree that the Purchase Prices of all Improvements may exceed the aggregate amount of the Bond proceeds and Surplus Special Taxes which will be available for the payment of the Purchase Prices. As provided in the Financing Plan, the Improvements may be financed with the proceeds of Bonds issued for the Improvement Areas and Surplus Special Taxes collected within either or both Improvement Areas. As also provided in the Financing Plan, the City’s grant of credits against Development Impact Fees (as defined in the Development Agreement) as a result of Owner’s construction of any Improvement shall not prevent the financing of all or any portion of the Purchase Price of suchImprovement with the proceeds of the Bonds and Surplus Special Taxes of the Improvement Areas. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 142 60297.00049\29181494.3 9 (ii) Timing of the Payment of the Purchase Price for an Improvement.Subject tothe limitations contained in (i) above and (iii) and (iv) below, the increment of the Purchase Price for each Improvement shall be paid to Owner within thirty (30) days after the date of the City Engineer’s approval of the payment request for any such increment; provided, however, no Retained Increment for any Improvement shall be paid earlier than thirty- five (35) days after the recording of a Notice of Completion for such Improvement. (iii) Source of Payment.The Purchase Price or any increment thereof for an Improvement shall be payable to the Owner from those proceeds (“Eligible Bond Proceeds”) of the sale of Bonds as provided in Section 20 hereof authorized and designated for the payment for such Improvement, after all costs of formation of CFD No. 16-I and all costs of issuance of such Bonds have been paid or proceeds set aside for such purpose and deposits of accrued and capitalized interest to the redemption fund of the project fund (the “Project Fund”) established pursuant to the Indenture (defined in Section 18 below) and the initial deposit to the reserve fund have been made. In accordance with the Financing Plan, the City shall allow the levy and collection of special taxes so as to generate Surplus Special Taxes (as defined in the Development Agreement). The Purchase Price or any increment thereof for an Improvement shall be payable to the Owner from the Surplus Special Taxes until the earlier of (i) the Owner’s submittal of its final payment request for the Improvements and payment in full for all amounts approved by the City for the Improvements, or (ii) the payment in full of all Bonds. (iv) Withholding of Payment.In addition to the foregoing, the City shall have the right to withhold payment of the Purchase Price or any increment thereof of any Improvement if (a) the Owner is delinquent in the payment of any assessment installments or special taxes levied by the City or a community facilities district established by the City on properties then owned by the Owner within CFD No. 16-I, (b)the City Engineer reasonably determines that the Owner is not then in substantial compliance with all applicable conditions and obligations imposed upon the Owner hereunder or upon the Development pursuant to the land use entitlements approved by the Cityfor the Development, including but not limited to, payment of all applicable fees, dedication of all applicable rights-of-way or other property and construction of all applicable public improvements. The City Engineer shall provide written notice to the Owner of the decision to withhold any such payment and shall specify the reason for such decision. If the payment is withheld as a result of the delinquency in the payment of assessment installments or special taxes, the notice shall identify the delinquent parcels and the amount of such delinquency. If the payment is withheld as a result of substantial non- compliance with a condition or obligation, the notice shall specify such condition or obligation and what action will be necessary by the Owner to substantially comply with such condition or obligation. Upon receipt by the City Engineer of evidence reasonably satisfactory to the City Engineer of the payment of the delinquent special taxes or assessments or upon the determination by the City Engineer that the Owner has 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 143 60297.00049\29181494.3 10 substantially complied with the subject condition or obligation, the City shall forthwith make any payment which has been withheld pursuant to the provisions of this paragraph. (g)Payment for Discrete Components. Discrete Components of Improvements may be approved for payment in accordance with the Financing Plan as an alternative to the payment of the Base Increment of any Improvement. As provided for in the Financing Plan, each Discrete Component shall be a component of an Improvement that the City has agreed can be separately identified and/or inspected. The payment request for each Discrete Component shall substantially conform to the form of payment request for a Base Increment attached hereto as Exhibit D. (h)Funding or Reimbursement of Contributions. Although Owner does not currently expect to request that Contributions (as defined in the Financing Plan) be financed through CFD No.16-I, Owner may request so in the future. Upon such request, Owner and City shall amend this Agreement to provide for the financing of Contributions consistent with the terms of the Financing Plan. SECTION 8.Audit. The authorized representatives of City shall have the right, upon two (2) days prior written notice to Owner and during normal businesshours, to review all books and records of Owner pertaining to costs and expenses incurred by Owner in construction of the Improvements. SECTION 9.Ownership and Transfer of Improvements. The conveyance of the Improvements by Owner to City shall be in accordance with the following procedures: (a)Improvements Constructed on Land not Owned by City. As a condition to the payment of the Retained Increment of the Purchase Price, Owner shall cause an irrevocable offer of dedication to be made to City or an outright grant of a fee interest or easement interest as appropriate, in the sole discretion of the City of the appropriate right, title and interest in and to the portion of the applicable property owned by the Owner related tothe applicable Improvement, including any temporary construction or access easements. Owner, whether or not it is the entity constructing the Improvements, agrees to execute and deliver to the City the documents required to complete the transfer of Acceptable Title for property owned by the Owner upon or within which such Improvements are to be located. For purposes of this Agreement, the term “Acceptable Title” shall mean title to the portion of the property to be conveyed free and clear of all taxes, liens, encumbrances, assessments, easements, leases, whether any such item is recorded or unrecorded, except (i) non-delinquent taxes and assessments and (ii) those non-monetary encumbrances and easements which are reasonably determined by the City not to interfere with the intended use of the portion of the property. As a further condition to the payment of the Retained Increment of the Purchase Price for any Improvement, Owner at its sole initial cost and expense, subject to reimbursement pursuant to Section 7, shall cause to be issued a policy of title insurance for such portion of the property in an amount not to exceed the Purchase Price and in the form normally required by City in connection with the dedication of land for subdivision improvements and containing such title 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 144 60297.00049\29181494.3 11 endorsements as may be reasonably requested by City. City’s final acceptance of the portion of the property and the Improvements constructed thereon shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. (b)Improvements Constructed on Land Owned by City. If Owner is authorized to construct an Improvement on land owned in fee by City or on land over which the City owns an easement Owner shall obtain the necessary encroachment permits to enter such land for purposesof constructing such Improvement. City shall cooperate with Owner in issuing such encroachment permits. The Improvements shall be inspected by City on an ongoing basis. SECTION 10.Grading and Subdivision Improvement Bonds.Except as provided below, Owner shall be required to post or cause the posting of bonds or other security acceptable to the City to guarantee completion of the Improvements in accordance with City’s standard subdivision requirements and conditions of approval of the Development Project (the “Conditions of Approval”). Labor and materials bonds shall also be required to be provided by the Owner’s contractor for all Improvements to be constructed under this agreement. Such bonds shall name the City of Chula Vista as additional obligee and shall remain in effect until the final acceptance of the Improvements by the City Engineer. The presence of Bond proceeds shall not relieve the Owner of requiring this obligation of the Owner’s contractor. Performance and labor and material bonds for specific Improvements shall not be required or may be released if: (1) such Improvements constitute a portion of the required subdivision improvements, (2) Bond proceeds equal to 125% of the estimated cost to construct or acquire such Improvements are available and set aside for such purpose, and (3) the Improvements are to be constructed or acquired entirely with the proceeds of the Bonds. Provided that conditions (1) and (2) are satisfied, if an Improvement is to be constructed or acquired only in partwith the proceeds of the Bonds, performance and labor and material bonds shall not be required for that portion of the Improvements to be so constructed or acquired except with respect to the portion that will not be acquired or constructed with Bond proceeds. In the event that the Bond proceeds that are available and may be set aside to fund the cost to construct or acquire an Improvement are less than 125% of the estimated cost thereof, the Owner shall be required to provide a performance and labor and material bond or other security satisfactory to the City Engineer and the City Attorney in the amount of such deficiency. City will cooperate with Owner in the termination or exoneration of any performance and labor and material bonds assuring completion ofImprovements for which bonds have been sold. The City Engineer shall be the sole judge of determining release of such bonds. SECTION 11.Indemnification by Owner. Owner shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers, agents and employees (the “Indemnified Parties”), from and against any and all claims, losses, liabilities, damages, including court costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees by reason of, or resulting from, or arising out of the design, engineering, solicitation of bids, award of contracts, administration of contracts and construction of the Improvements by the Owner, its employees, agents, independent contractors and/or representatives; provided that any claims for personal injury or property damage whichrelate to 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 145 60297.00049\29181494.3 12 the Improvements shall be limited to those arising out of personal injury or property damage caused by actions or omissions by Owner or Owner’s employees, agents, independent contractors or representatives which occurred during the period prior to the transfer of title to the Improvements by City, whether or not a claim is filed prior to the date of acceptance of the Improvements. Nothing in this Section 11 shall limit in any manner the rights of the City and/or CFD No. 16-I against any of the architects, engineers, contractors or other consultants employed by the Owner which has performed work in connection with construction or financing of the Improvements. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Owner shall have no obligation to defend, indemnify or hold harmless the Indemnified Parties from and against any claims, liabilities, losses or damages (including court costs and attorneys’ fees) which result from or arise out of the sole negligence or willful misconduct of an Indemnified Party. Except as setforth in this Section 11, no provision of this Agreement shall in any way limit the extent of the responsibility of Owner for payment of damages resulting from the operations of the Owner, its agents, employees or contractors. SECTION 12.Obligation of City. Neither the City nor CFD No. 16-I has a legal or financial obligation to construct the Improvements. All costs incurred for actual construction of the Improvements, including all incidentals thereto, shall be borne by Owner, and the obligations of theCity and CFD No.16-I are limited to the acquisition of the Improvements pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. SECTION 13.Failure by Owner to Construct Improvements.At any time following commencement of the construction of any Improvements by the Owner the City determines that such construction is not progressing within a reasonable time in accordance with the Conditions of Approval or the Owner fails to demonstrate a continuing ability to complete the construction of such Improvement in accordance with the Conditions of Approval, the City may give written notice of such failure of performance to the Owner. Owner shall have sixty (60) days from the date of receipt of such notice to either (i) cure such failure of performance by demonstrating to the satisfaction of the City during such cure period reasonable progress in the construction of the Improvement and a continuing ability to complete the construction of such Improvement in accordance with the Conditions of Approval or (ii) reasonably demonstrate that such failure of performance is due to circumstances or conditions beyond Owner’s reasonable control (“Force Majeure”) including, without limitation, the City’s actions, omissions or inaction which result in a delay of performance by Owner, labordisputes, acts of God, war, riots, insurrections, civil commotions, moratoriums, inability to obtain labor or materials or reasonable substitutes for either, fire, unusual delay in transportation, and adverse weather conditions. Should Owner fail to reasonably demonstrate such reasonable progress or such continuing ability to complete the construction of such Improvement or Force Majeure, the obligation of the City to pay the Purchase Price for the acquisition of such Improvement pursuant to this Agreement may be terminated by the City by providing ten (10) days written notice to the Owner. Upon termination, the City may in its sole discretion then proceed to advertise and bid the balance of the construction of such Improvement, and there will be no further obligation on the part of the City for payment of the Purchase Price for such Improvement due to Owner pursuant to this Agreement. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 146 60297.00049\29181494.3 13 In the event that the City chooses not to advertise and bid the balance of the construction of any such Improvement following such a termination, any monies remaining in the Project Fund and set aside for the acquisition of such Improvement shall be transferred to the redemption fund established by the Indenture and used to call outstanding Bonds. SECTION 14.Agreement Contingent. As a precondition to the sale of each series of the Bonds of CFD No. 16-I, Owner shall pay in cash to City an origination charge of 1.0% of the amount of the principal amount of such series of the Bonds (“Origination Payment”). Each such Origination Payment shall be at Owner’s own expense and not recoverable from the proceeds of the special taxes or from the proceeds of the Bonds. In the event that any series of the Bonds are, for any reason, not sold, the amount of the Origination Payment made for such series of the Bonds shall be returned to the Owner. The City may, at its option, suspend the performance of its obligations under this Agreement if any legal challenge is filed relating to the validity or enforceability of this Agreement, CFD No. 16-I proceedings or the issuance of the Bonds. The obligations of the City and CFD No. 16-I hereunder shall be reinstated upon the entry of a final judgment in any such proceedings upholding the validity and enforceability of the Agreement, CFD No. 16-I proceedings and the issuance of the Bonds. In the event that a final judgment or other final and non-appealable resolution is entered invalidating or declaring unenforceable this Agreement, CFD No. 16-I proceedings or the issuance of the Bonds, the City andCFD No. 16-I may, at their option, terminate this Agreement. SECTION 15.Notice of Special Tax. Owner, or the successor or assigns of the Owner, including but not limited to all Merchant Builders (as such term is defined in Section 16 below), shall provide written notice to all potential purchasers of lots in the form required pursuant to Government Code Section 53341.5 and/or such additional requirements as may be established by the City so advising the potential owner of the fact of CFD No. 16-I, with said document being executed by the potential purchaser. Such notice shall be provided to the potential purchaser a reasonable time before the potential purchaser becomes contractually committed to purchase the lot so that the potential purchaser may knowingly consider the impact of the special tax in the decision to purchase the lot. A copy of all such notices executed by actual purchasers shall be sent to the City Engineer. SECTION 16.Limitation of Aggregate Taxes and Assessments. Owner agrees to include in any future agreement to sell all or any portion of the property to any person or entity for the purpose of constructing and marketing owner-occupied residential dwelling units (each, a “Merchant Builder”) provisions requiring the inclusion of the following “escrow instructions” in all sales by such Merchant Builder to residential home owners. (a)At or prior to the close of each such escrow with a residential homeowner, the escrow company shall apply a “calculation formula” previously approved by the City Engineer and deposited with the escrow company by the Merchant Builder to determine the aggregate of all annual ad valorem property taxes, all special taxes authorized to be levied to finance the 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 147 60297.00049\29181494.3 14 construction or acquisition of public facilities andall assessment installments authorized to be levied to finance the construction or acquisition of public facilities (the “Total Annual Taxes and Assessments”) applicable to the parcel subject to such escrow (the “Applicable Parcel”). (b)If the Total Annual Taxes and Assessments exceed 2% of the sales price of the Applicable Parcel, the Escrow Company will make immediate written demand upon the Merchant Builder for deposit into the escrow of the funds necessary to partially prepay the special tax obligation for CFD No. 16-I or any other community facilities district so that the Total Annual Taxes and Assessments will thereafter be equal to or less than 2% of the sales price of the Applicable Parcel. Such funds must be received by the escrow company prior to the close of escrow of the sale of the Applicable Parcel. The calculation of the prepayment amount for CFD No. 16-I shall be in accordance with the method of prepayment of special tax as set forth in the rate and method of apportionment of special taxesapproved by the qualified electors of CFD No. 16-I or the other community facilities district for which the special taxes are being partially prepaid. Upon closing of such escrow, the amount so deposited by the Merchant Builder pursuant to this escrow instruction shall be sent by the escrow company to the Director of Finance, together with written instructions that such amount is to be used to partially prepay the special tax obligation of the Applicable Parcel for CFD No. 16-I or shall be sent to the other community facilities district for which the special tax obligation has been prepaid with similar written instructions. The provisions of this Section 16 related to sales by Merchant Builders to residential homeowners shall also apply to any sale by Owner of a parcel to a residential home owner. In addition to any other remedy provided for by law or in equity, the City may enforce the provisions of this Section 16 by an action for specific performance or injunctive relief or both. SECTION 17.Relationship to Public Works.This Agreement is for the construction and acquisition of certain Improvements by City and the sale of the Bonds for the payment of construction and acquisition costs for such Improvements and such other amounts as are herein provided, and is not intended to be a public works contract. In performing its obligations under this Agreement, Owner is an independent contractor and not the agent of City. City shall have no responsibility for payment to any contractor or supplier of Owner. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Owner may be subject to certain public contract requirements as provided in Section 3 of this Agreement. SECTION 18.Sale of Bonds.The City shall, immediately upon execution of this Agreement by the parties hereto, proceedwith the issuance and sale of an initial series of bonds secured by the levy of special taxes within Improvement Area No.1 (the “Bonds”) to be issued pursuant to the Act and the Financing Plan. The Bonds shall be issued in one or more series and each series shall be sized so that as of the date of issuance of such series of the Bonds the aggregate appraised value of all taxable properties within the Improvement Area for which such Bonds are being issued shall comply with the value-to-lien standards set forth in the Financing Plan or as otherwise approved by the City Council pursuant to the Goals and Policies. In addition, as to any subsequent series of Bonds, the issuance of such Bonds shall comply with the Financing Plan and 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 148 60297.00049\29181494.3 15 such parity bonds test as may be set forth in the Bond Indenture. The appraised value of taxable property for purposes of this paragraph shall be determined by an independent appraisal undertaken for the City utilizing appraisal assumptions approved by the City and, as to each subsequent series of the Bonds, consistent with the applicable parity bonds requirements. The proceeds of each series of the Bonds shall be used in the following priority to (i) fund a reserve fund for the payment of principal and interest with respect to such Bonds; (ii) as provided in the Financing Plan, fund up to eighteen (18) months of capitalized interest on such Bonds in an amount not to exceed the amount required to pay interest on such Bonds, or a lesser amount requested by Owner; (iii) pay for costs of issuance of such Bonds including, without limitation, underwriter’s discount, bond counsel fees, printing, and paying agent fees; (iv) as to the first series of the Bonds, pay for the costs of forming CFD No. 16-I, including reimbursement of advances of funds to the City by Owner pursuant to the Deposit Agreement to pay for the City’s legal, engineering, financial, special tax, appraisal and market absorption consulting expenses incurred relating to the formation of CFD No. 16-I and issuance of the Bonds; and (v) pay the costs of the acquisition or construction of the Improvements. The timing of the issuance and sale of each series of the Bonds, the terms and conditions upon which such Bonds shall be issued and sold, the method of sale of such Bonds and the pricing thereof shall be determined by the City and shall conform to the Goals and Policies, the Financing Plan and this Agreement. The sale of each series of the Bonds shall be subject to receipt by the City of a competitively bid or negotiated bond purchase agreement which is acceptable to the City. The sale of each series of the Bonds shall also be conditional upon the preparation of an official statement that is, in the sole judgment of the City, “deemed final” as such term is used in Rule 15c2-12 of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Rule”). The principal amount of each series of the Bonds to be issued shall be determined in accordance with the Goals and Policies and the Financing Plan such that the maximum projected annual special tax revenues securing such Bonds and all outstanding parity Bonds, equals at least 110% of the projected annual gross debt service on all of the Bonds following the issuance of such series of the Bonds. Owner, on behalf of itself, any affiliates of the Owner and any successor or assign of the Owner including but not limited to all Merchant Builders, agrees (a) to provide all information regarding the development of the property within the Improvement Area for which Bonds are being issued, including the financing plan for such development, which are necessary to ensure that the official statement for each series of the Bonds complies with the requirements of the Rule and all other applicable federal and state securities laws; (b) to enter into a continuing disclosureagreement to provide such continuing disclosure pertaining to the Improvement Area, the development thereof and the Owner as necessary to ensure ongoing compliance with the continuing disclosure requirements of the Rule and (c) to cause its counsel to provide an opinion of such counsel in a form satisfactory to the underwriter of such series of the Bonds and underwriter’s counsel or disclosure counsel, as applicable. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 149 60297.00049\29181494.3 16 SECTION 21. Supplemental Bill for Payment of Special Taxes. Owner acknowledges that the rate and method of apportionment of Special Taxes provides that the annual Special Tax shall be collected in the same manner and at the same time as ordinary ad valorem property taxes; provided, however, that CFD No. 16-I, may directly bill the Special Tax, may collect Special Taxes at a different time or in a different manner if necessary to meet its financial obligations. The City has represented to the Owner that delinquencies in the payment of special taxes intended to be collected on property tax bills have occurred in other community facilities districts formed by the City as a result of difficulties experienced by the office of the Treasurer-Tax Collector of the County of San Diego (the “Tax Collector”) in the timely billing and collection of such special taxes. If and to the extent that the Tax Collector fails, for whatever reason, to timely bill the full amount of the special taxes levied on properties owned by the Owner or any affiliate of the Owner within CFD No. 16-I, the City, on behalf of CFD No. 16-I, may elect to directly and separately bill (“Direct Bill”) the Owner for such deficiency and Owner agrees to (a) pay such deficiency within the time period specified in such Direct Bill which shall be no less than thirty calendar days from the date of mailing of such Direct Bill or (b) provide the Director of Finance with proof of payment to the Tax Collector of such deficiency in a form satisfactory to the Director of Finance. Should the Owner pay such deficiency directly to the City pursuant to a Direct Bill, the City agrees upon receipt of such payment to timely submit an amendment of the Special Tax levy on the Owner’s property to the Tax Collector to reduce such levy by the amount of such payment. Delinquency in the payment of a Direct Billsent pursuant to the preceding paragraph shall not be enforceable as a personal obligation of the Owner but shall be enforceable in the same manner as if such delinquency had been for the payment of special taxes billed on the property tax bill. SECTION 22.Conflict with Other Agreements. Except as specifically provided herein, nothing contained herein shall be construed as releasing Owner or the Merchant Builders from any condition of development or requirement imposed by any other agreement with City. To the extent the provisions of this Agreement conflict with any provisions of the Development Agreement, the provisions of the Development Agreement, including the Financing Plan, shall control. SECTION 23.General Standard of Reasonableness. Any provision of this Agreement which requires the consent, approval, discretion or acceptance of any party hereto or any of their respective employees, officers or agents shall be deemed to require that such consent, approval or acceptance not be unreasonably withheld or delayed, unless such provision expressly incorporates a different standard. SECTION 24.Entire Agreement; Amendment. This Agreement and the agreements expressly referred to herein contains all of the agreements of the parties hereto with respect to the matters contained herein and no prior or contemporaneous agreement or understandings, oral or written, pertaining to any such matters shall be effective for any purpose. No provision of this Agreement may be modified, waiver, amended or added to except by a writing signed by the party against which the enforcement of such modification, waiver, amendment or addition is or may be sought. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 150 60297.00049\29181494.3 17 SECTION 25.Notices. Any notice, payment or instrument required or permitted by this Agreement to be given or delivered to either party shall be deemed to have been received when personally delivered or seventy-two (72) hours following deposit of the same in any United States Post Office in California, registered or certified, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: Owner:SLF IV -Millenia, LLC 5949 Sherry Lane, Suite 1750 Dallas, TX 75225 Attn:Heather Shannon And Millenia Real Estate Group 2750 Womble Road, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92016 Attn:Todd Galarneau, Executive Vice President With a copy to: John P.Yeager, Esq. O’Neil LLP 19900 MacArthur Blvd., Suite 1050 Irvine, CA 92612 City:City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Attn: City Manager With a copy to: 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Attn:City Attorney Each party may change its address for delivery of notice by delivering written notice of such change of address to the other party. SECTION 26.Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is held to be illegal or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this Agreement shall be given effect to the fullest extent reasonably possible. SECTION 27.Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of the parties hereto. Owner may not assign its rights or obligations hereunder except upon written notice to City within ten (10) days of the date of such assignment indicating the name and address of the assignee. No other owner of property within 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 151 60297.00049\29181494.3 18 CFD No.16-I shall have any right to receive payments with respect to any Improvement unless such right has been expressly assigned to such owner by Owner in writing. Upon such notice and the assumption by the assignee of the rights, duties and obligations of the Owner arising under or from this Agreement, Owner shall be released by City from all future duties or obligations rising under or from this Agreement. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, Owner may assign its rights and obligations hereunder as security to lenders for thepurpose of obtaining loans to finance development within CFD No. 16-I, but no such assignment shall release Owner from its obligations hereunder to City. SECTION 28.Governing Law. This Agreement and any dispute arising hereunder shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California, Additionally, this Agreement and the construction of the Improvements shall be subject to all City ordinances and regulations relating to the requirement of improvement agreements, land division, improvement security or other applicable development requirements. SECTION 29.Waiver. Failure by a party to insist upon the strict performance of any of the provisions of this Agreement by any other party, or the failure by a party to exerciseits rights under the default of any other party, shall not constitute a waiver of such party’s right to insist and demand strict compliance by any other party with the terms of this Agreement thereafter. SECTION 30.Singular and Plural; Gender. As used herein, the singular of any work includes the plural, and terms in the masculine gender shall include the feminine. SECTION 31.Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original. SECTION 32.Construction of Agreement.This Agreement has been reviewed by legal counsel for both the City and the Owner and shall be deemed for all purposes to have been jointly drafted by the City and the Owner. No presumption or rule that ambiguities shall be construed against the drafting party shall apply to the interpretation or enforcement of this Agreement. The language in all parts of this Agreement, in all cases, shall be construed as a whole and in accordance with its fair meaning and not strictly for or against anyparty and consistent with the provisions hereof, in order to achieve the objectives of the parties hereunder. The captions of the sections and subsections of this Agreement are for convenience only and shall not be considered or referred to in resolving questions of construction. SECTION 33. Recitals; Exhibits.Any recitals set forth above and any attached exhibits are incorporated by reference into this Agreement. SECTION 34. Authority of Signatories.Each signatory and party hereto hereby represents and warrants to the other party that it has legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this Agreement, and that all resolutions and/or other actions have been taken so as to enable such party to enter into this Agreement. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 152 60297.00049\29181494.3 19 SECTION 35.Recordation.The parties shall execute, acknowledge and cause this Agreement, or a memorandum of this Agreement in a form satisfactory to the parties hereto, to be recorded against the taxable property within CFD No.16-I in the Official Recordsof San Diego County. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 153 #165320 v3 9176.2 S -1 60297.00049\29181494.3 Signature Page to Acquisition/Financing Agreement by and between the City of Chula Vista and SLF IV -Millenia, LLC IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Owner have executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date thereby indicating that they have read and understood same, and indicate their full and complete consent to its terms. “CITY” CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY MANAGER CITY OF CHULA VISTA STATE OF CALIFORNIA ATTEST:APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY CLERK GLEN R. GOOGINS, CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY OF CHULA VISTA STATE OF CALIFORNIA STATE OF CALIFORNIA 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 154 #165320 v3 9176.2 S -2 60297.00049\29181494.3 “OWNER” SLV IV –MILLENIA, LLC a Delaware limited liability company By:SLF IV Millennia Investor, LLC, a Texas limited liability company, its sole and managing member By:Stratford Land Fund IV, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, its co-managing member By:Stratford Fund IV GP, LLC a Texas limited liability company, its general partner By: Name: Title: 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 155 #165320 v3 9176.2 A -1 60297.00049\29181494.3 EXHIBIT “A” ACQUISITION AND FINANCING AGREEMENT FOR CFD16-I(MILLENIA) IMPROVEMENT DESCRIPTION AND ESTIMATED COSTS [SEE ATTACHED] 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 156 #165320 v3 9176.2 A -2 60297.00049\29181494.3 MILLENIA –ESTIMATE OF CFD FACILITY COSTS IMPROVEMENT1 ESTIMATED COST 1. Boundary Arterials (TDIF Facilities) a) Eastlake Parkway widening, medians, etc $463,476 b) Birch Road widening, median landscaping, water quality, etc $556,290 2. Millenia Avenue (north and south)$9,346,478 a)North-Birch Road the Stylus Street $2,444,462 b)South-Stylus Street to Avant Street $6,902,016 3. Internal Streets (including Artisan Street, Group 1 and 2 streets, and all Phase 2A,B and C streets)$20,614,016 a)Artisan, Group 1 and Group 2 streets $6,881,862 b)Phase 2A-2C streets $13,732,153 4. Bus Rapid Transit Guideway a) Phase 1 Guideway Improvements $1,467,000$4,244,581 a) Phase 2 Guideway Improvements $2,777,581 b) Orion street mixed flow lanes (to the extent not reimbursed as part of the street improvements above) 5. Sidewalks and Pedestrian Corridor Improvement constructedby merchant builders and not covered as $13,522,850 part of the 2A-2C street improvements above) 6. Pedestrian Bridge facilities a) Pedestrian Bridge $2,200,000 b) Pedestrian trail to Eastlake Parkway (including retaining walls, barrier fencing, lighting and appurtenant facilities)$600,000 7. Traffic Signals 8. Storm Drain Facilities a) Wolf Canyon Basin inlet structure modifications $174,800 9. Sewer Facilities a) On-site Incl in streets b) Poggi $345,000 c) Salt Creek lateral (costs do not include environmental mitigation costs)$161,000 d) Hunte Parkway Bypass (If needed)$407,100 10. Library (including land, airspace or condominium interests)TBD 11. Fire Station facilities and Equipment $8,000,000 12. Public Parks, including land and improvements a) P-1 $4,787,321 b) P-2 $3,921,940 c) P-3 $5,518,071 d) P-4 $3,654,512 e) P-5 $4,638,132 f) P-6 $8,713,948 13. Environmental Mitigation Land (excluding any land required to be dedicated by conditions of approval)TBD 14. Art or Cultural Venue TBD 15. Other City-owned public facilities TBD 1 Improvements listed above may be acquired as discrete components as provided for in the Development Agreement and depicted on the City improvement plans 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 157 #165320 v3 9176.2 B-1 60297.00049\29181494.3 EXHIBIT “B” SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION CRITERIA FOR IMPROVEMENTS General: 1.Substantial completion of an Improvement for purposes of determining the eligibility of such Improvement for the payment of the “Base Increment” therefore shall mean that the construction or work with respect to such Improvement, including each component of such Improvement, has progressedto the point where it is sufficiently complete so that it can be utilized for the purpose for which it was intended. Substantial completion criteria for each Improvement or component of an Improvement is further described below. 2.Payment for the “Retained Increment” of the Purchase Price for an Improvement shall be in accordance with Section 7, paragraph (c)(ii) and shall be made after submittal of a payment request form, as-built plans and such other documentation as is required pursuant to Section 7 paragraph (c)(ii), posting of maintenance bonds, and submittal of lien release evidence. Substantial Completion Criteria: A.Grading: Grading shall be deemed to be complete upon (1) completion of all preliminary grading work (mobilization, site clearing, remedial grading, overexcavation, installation of subdrainage systems) (2) certification of compaction by the geotechnical engineer, quantity verification by the civil engineer, and confirmation by the City inspector and (3) installation of all surface gradingimprovements (brow ditches, retaining walls, slope protection and similar improvements) and the certification thereof by the geotechnical engineer and confirmation by the City inspector. B.Sewer: Sewer construction shall be deemed substantially complete upon the installation, flushing, and testing of sewer main line, laterals, cleanouts, manholes, and all other appurtenances of the sewer system as shown on the approved plans and specifications therefore and in accordance with the City standard plans and specifications and the verification of such installation by the civil engineer and confirmation of such installation by the City inspector. C.Storm Drain: Box culverts and headwall structures shall be deemed substantially complete upon installation as shown on the approved plans and specifications therefore and in accordance with the City standard plans and specifications and verification of such installation by the civil engineer, and confirmation of such installation by the City inspector. D.Drainage Facilities: Drainage structures including energy dissipation devices (rip-rap, drop structures, cut-off walls, etc), drainage diversion structures, facilities required as part of the environmental mitigation measures, and other drainage channel appurtenances including drainage pipes connecting the brow ditches to the channel, shall be deemed substantially complete for payment of the Base Increment upon the installation thereof as shown on the 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 158 #165320 v3 9176.2 B-2 60297.00049\29181494.3 approved plans and specifications therefore and in accordance with City standard plans and specifications and the verification of such installation by the civil engineer and confirmation of such installation by the City inspector. E.Dry Utility Backbone System: Dry utilities (electric, gas, telephone, CATV) shall be deemed substantially complete upon the installation of the conduits, junction boxes, payment of utility fees, and written acceptance of the facilities by the utility companies. F.Roadway Pavement and Roadway Drainage System: Roadway pavement and drainage improvements shall be deemed substantially complete upon the installation thereof as shown on the approved improvement plans therefore and in accordance with City standard plans and specifications and confirmation of such installation by the City inspector of allstorm drain pipes, catch basins, drainage inlets and cleanouts for the roadway storm drain system, installation of roadway base material, concrete curb and gutter, and AC pavement including the preparation of the subgrade and base material. G.Other Street Surface Improvements: Street surface improvements including street lights, traffic signals and conduits, signal interconnect, street name signs, roadway signing and striping, and appurtenances shall be deemed substantially complete when installed as shown on the improvement plans and in accordance with City standard plans and specifications and upon confirmation of such installation by the City inspector. H.Street Landscape Irrigation and Planting: Parkway landscaping within the roadway right of way including planting, irrigation, concrete sidewalks, median maintenance strip, pedestrian ramps, channel maintenance roads and all associated subgrade and base material preparation shall be deemed substantially complete upon installation thereof as shown on the approved improvement plans therefore and in accordance with City standard plans and specifications and confirmation of such installation by the City inspector. I.Slope Landscaping: Landscape planting and irrigation improvements for the slopes outside of theroadway and channel right of way and the regional trail (DG) and fencing shall be deemed substantially complete upon installation thereof as shown on the approved improvement plans therefore and in accordance with City standard plans and specifications and confirmation of such installation by the City inspector. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 159 #165320 v3 9176.2 C-1 60297.00049\29181494.3 EXHIBIT “C” DESIGN,BID,CONTRACT AND CHANGE ORDER REQUIREMENTS 1.General These requirements shall be applied to all improvements proposed to be constructed by the Owner and subsequently acquired by the City through CFD No. 16-I. Except as expressly provided otherwise in the body of this Agreement itself, any deviation from these requirements must be approved in writing in advance by the City Engineer. References to the City Engineer means the City Engineer or his or her designee. The City reserves the right to make the final determination of cost of the Improvements to be acquired in accordance with this Agreement. 2.Design Phase A.Design costs related to the Initial Improvements are not eligible for inclusion. B.Bidding Documents. Two complete sets of bidding documents, including improvement plans, general provisions, and bid proposal forms have been or shall be submitted to the Engineering Division for review and approval within 15working days of submittal. Advertising for bids shall not have taken place or shall not take place until the bidding documents are approved in writing by the City. This procedure shall have been followed or shall be followed for each contract proposed to be advertised. Unless otherwise noted, the bidding documents shall conform to the following minimum requirements: 1.Unless impractical due to the nature of the improvement, the bid proposal shall be unit priced rather than lump sum. A.C. pavement, base and sub-base shall be bid on a square foot per inch thickness basis. 2.The bidding documents shall require the bidder/contractor to provide the following bonds: a.Bid Bond -10% of the amount of the bid. b.Material and Labor Bond -50% of the contract amount. c.Performance Bond -100% of the contract amount. The Contractor posted or shall post performance and labor and material bonds for all improvements as part of the bid. The City of Chula Vista shall be named as additional obligee with the right to call such bonds if needed. Such bonds shall 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 160 #165320 v3 9176.2 C-2 60297.00049\29181494.3 remain in effect until such time as all improvements are completed and accepted by the City Engineer. The City Engineer shall be the sole judge in determining the release of such bonds. 3.The bidding documents required or shall require the successful bidder to provide evidence of comprehensive or commercial general public liability insurance in the amount of at least $1,000,000 prior to the award of the contract. 4.The contractor is required to pay prevailing wages. 5.The bidding documents clearly stated or must clearly state the time, date, and place where bids are to be submitted and opened. 6.The bidding documents clearly stated or shall clearly state the amount of time to complete the work. The time allowed must be reasonable for the amount of work. Accelerated construction time allowances must be supplementally bid, and are not eligible for public finance unless previously approved by the City Engineer. 3.Bidding Phase A.The Notice inviting Sealed Bids was published or shall be published in the Chula Vista Star News and the San Diego Daily Transcript. The notice inviting bids stated or shall state where bidding documents are available. B.The bidding period following the advertisement of the Notice Inviting Sealed Bids was or shall be a minimum of 14 calendar days. C.Owner provided or shall provide complete sets of bidding documents to all contractors, subcontractors, or suppliers requesting them. A reasonable price may be charged forbidding documents. D.Owner kept or shall keep a log of all persons obtaining bidding documents, and their mailing address. E.Addenda were mailed or shall be mailed by first class mail to all bidding document holders and the City Engineer. If an addendum is required within five working days of the noticed bid opening date, the bid opening date shall be extended. F.Submitted bids were or shall be in sealed envelopes. G.Bids were not or shall not be accepted after the stated time for submission. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 161 #165320 v3 9176.2 C-3 60297.00049\29181494.3 H.Bid opening was or shall be conducted by the Owner at the Owner’s place of business or other site mutually acceptable to the Owner and City Engineer. I.Sealed bids were or shall be opened and read aloud immediately following the submission time. A City representative was or shall be invited to attend the bid opening. J.Conditioned bids, unless the bid proposal lists them for all to bid on, were not accepted or shall not be accepted. K.The bid proposals conformed or shall conform to all state and local laws governing the listing of subcontractors and suppliers. L.The arithmetic of the two lowest bid proposals received was or shall immediately be checked for errors. M.A tabulation of all bids received was or shall be provided to the City Engineer within five working days of the bid opening. N.Award was or shall be made to the lowest responsible bidder within a reasonable period of time following approval by the City Engineer. O.A preconstruction meeting was or shall be held with the contractor prior to beginning the work. A City representative was or shall be invited to attend the meeting. P.The Notice to Proceed was or shall be issued within a reasonable period of time following the contract execution. 4.Construction Phase A.The City was or shall be provided a copy of the construction schedule. B.Owner did or shall require the contractor to conduct weekly construction status meetings to which a City representative shall be invited. C.Any additional costs incurred for the benefit of the Owner, such as accelerating the construction schedule, shall not be eligible for public financing unless previously approved by the City Engineer. D.Any additional construction costs incurred due solely to delays caused by the Owner shall not be eligiblefor public financing. E.All contracts and construction related records shall be available to the City as and when required for the final determination of eligible costs for the public financing. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 162 #165320 v3 9176.2 C-4 60297.00049\29181494.3 This shall include trip tickets and other confirmations ofmaterial delivered to the Improvement. 5.Change Orders A.No single change order for a Transportation Development Impact Fee Improvement (“TDIF Improvement”) that may be constructed as an Improvement shall be eligible for inclusion in the Purchase Price for such Improvement that increases or decreases the original contract amount for the construction of such Improvement by more than $50,000 without City Council approval. B.All change orders shall be fully documented and be in a format consistent with the original bid items (i.e., show units, unit costs, extensions and total costs). The City Engineer, in his/her sole discretion shall determine the eligibility of each change order for inclusion in the Purchase Price for an Improvement. C.The aggregate of all change orders for TDIF Improvements constructed as Improvements, including those for differences between estimated and actual quantities shall not increase the contract amount by more than the amount specified below without City Council approval: Original Contract Range Maximum Aggregate Increase Up to $100,000 10% $100,001 to $1,000,000 $10,000 plus 7% of amount over $100,000 More than $1,000,000 $73,000 plus 5% of amount over $1,000,000 The aggregate of all change orders for any non-TDIF Improvement shall not increase the Purchase Price thereof so as to cause such Purchase Price to exceed the cost estimate for such Improvement as set forth in Exhibit A by more than 25% without City Council approval. D.All change orders involving changes in scope of the project, or increases of contract amounts greater than outlined in C. above shall be submitted to the City Council for approval after the construction of the Improvement is completed, but before the payment of any portion of the Purchase Price for such Improvement is authorized by the City Engineer. Change orders that the Owner does not wish to include in the Purchase Price for an Improvement do not need to go to City Council for approval. E.Negotiated set price change orders are acceptable where most of the items of work in the change order have unit prices from the bids. Where change orders are for work that does not have unit prices for a substantial portion of the work contained within the bids, time and materials change orders are preferred. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 163 #165320 v3 9176.2 D-1 60297.00049\29181494.3 Exhibit “D” City of Chula Vista Community Facilities District No. 16-I (Millenia) Base Increment Payment Request No. ______ The undersigned (the “Owner”) hereby requests payment in the total amount of $__________ for the Base Increment for the Improvements (as defined in the Acquisition/Financing Agreement by and among the City of Chula Vista (the “City”) and Owner and described in Exhibit A to that Agreement), all as more fully described in Attachment 1 hereto. In connection with this Payment Request, the undersigned hereby certifies, represents and warrants to the City as follows: A.He(she) is a duly authorized representative or signatory of Owner, qualified to execute this Payment Request for payment on behalf of Owner and is knowledgeable as to the matters set forth herein. B.The Improvements that are the subject of this Payment Request have been substantially completed in accordance with Exhibits B and C. C.This request for payment of the Base Increment for the Improvements has been calculated in conformance with the terms of the Agreement. All costs for which payment is requested hereby are eligible costs (as permitted in the Agreement) and have not been inflated in any respect. The Base Increment for which payment is requested has not been the subject of any prior payment request paid by the City. D.All items have been clearly delineated as DIF/Non-DIF eligible (all DIFs) and detailed backup and cost breakdown is provided supporting each item. E.Supporting documentation (such as third party invoices,change orders and checks) is attached with respect to each cost for which payment is requested. F.The Improvements for which payment is requested were constructed in accordance with the requirements of the Agreement. G.Owner is in compliance with the terms and provisions of the Agreement. H.No mechanics liens or other encumbrances have attached, or to the best knowledge of Owner, after due inquiry, will attach to the Improvements. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 164 #165320 v3 9176.2 D-2 60297.00049\29181494.3 I.A cop(ies) of the letter(s) of unconditional lien release for the Improvements for which payment is requested is included this request. Alternatively, a copy of a letter of conditional lien release for the Improvements for which payment is requested together with a letter from the contractor(s) stating that they have been paid in full by the Owner for the Improvements for which payment is requested is also included in this request. I hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the above representations and warranties are true and correct. OWNER: Dated: CITY Payment Request Approved for Submission to Director of Finance Director of Engineering Dated: 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 165 #165320 v3 9176.2 D-3 60297.00049\29181494.3 ATTACHMENT 1 SUMMARY OF IMPROVEMENTS TO BE ACQUIRED AS PART OF PAYMENT REQUEST NO. _____ Improvement Cost Estimate Base Increment Disbursement Requested [List here all Improvements for which payment is requested, and attach supporting documentation] 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 166 #165320 v3 9176.2 E-1 60297.00049\29181494.3 Exhibit “E” City of Chula Vista Community Facilities District No. 16-I (Millenia) Retained Increment Payment Request No.______ The undersigned (the “Owner”) hereby requests payment in the total amount of $__________ for the Retained Increment of the Purchase Price of the Improvements (as defined in the Acquisition/Financing Agreement by and among the City of Chula Vista (the “City”) and Owner and described in Exhibit A to that Agreement), all as more fully described in Attachment 1 hereto. In connection with this Payment Request, the undersigned hereby certifies, represents and warrants to the City as follows: A.He(she) isa duly authorized representative or signatory of Owner, qualified to execute this Payment Request for payment on behalf of Owner and is knowledgeable as to the matters set forth herein. B.Owner has submitted or submits herein to the City, if applicable, as-built drawings or similar plans and specifications for the Improvements and such drawings or plans and specifications, as applicable, are true, correct and complete. C.The Purchase Price for the Improvements has been calculated in conformance with the terms of the Agreement. All costs for which payment is requested hereby are eligible costs (as permitted in the Agreement) and have not been inflated in any respect. The Retained Increment for which payment is requested has not been the subject of any prior payment request paid by the City. D.All items have been clearly delineated as DIF/Non-DIF eligible (all DIFs) and detailed backup and cost breakdown is provided supporting each item. E.Supporting documentation (such as third party invoices, change orders, lien releases and checks) is attached with respect to each cost for which payment is requested. F.The Improvements for which payment is requested were constructed in accordance with the requirements of the Agreement. G.Owner is in compliance with the terms and provisions of the Agreement. H.No mechanics liens or other encumbrances have attached, or to the best knowledge of Owner, after one inquiry, will attach to the Improvements. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 167 #165320 v3 9176.2 E-2 60297.00049\29181494.3 I hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the above representations and warrantiesare true and correct. OWNER: Dated: CITY Payment Request Approved for Submission to Director of Finance City Engineer Dated: 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 168 #165320 v3 9176.2 E-3 60297.00049\29181494.3 ATTACHMENT 1 SUMMARY OF IMPROVEMENTS TO BE ACQUIRED AS PART OF PAYMENT REQUEST NO. _____ Improvement Purchase price Base Increment Retained Increment Disbursement Requested [List here all Improvements for which payment is requested, and attach supporting documentation] 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 169 #165320 v3 9176.2 F-1 60297.00049\29181494.3 EXHIBIT “F” LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 170 City of Chula Vista Staff Report File#:16-0451, Item#: 4. ORDINANCEOFTHECITYOFCHULAVISTAAPPROVINGAMENDMENTSTOOTAYRANCH FREEWAYCOMMERCIALSECTIONALPLANNINGAREA(SPA)PLANNEDCOMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS (SECOND READING AND ADOPTION) RECOMMENDED ACTION Council adopt the ordinance. SUMMARY Baldwin&Sons,LLC(“Applicant”or“Developer”)isrequestingtoamendtheFreewayCommercial SectionalPlanningArea(SPA)PlanandtheassociatedPlannedCommunity(PC)District Regulations,inordertodevelopamixedusecenterwithacombinationofcommercial,multi-family, andmixeduseresidentialonanapproximately36-acresiteinthenorthernportionoftheFreeway CommercialSPA.TheprojectalsoincludesaTentativeMapandaMasterPrecisePlanthat establishesaunified,walkable,mixedusecommunityintendedtoenhanceliving,working,shopping, andtransitoptionsinthearea.AnEIRAddendumwithadditionalinformationandanalysisconcerning potentiallanduseimpactsasaresultoftheproposedamendmentswillalsobeconsidered.On September 24, 2015, the applicant filed applications to process all of the subject items. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Environmental Notice TheProjectwasadequatelycoveredinpreviouslyadopted/certifiedFinalEnvironmentalImpact Report(FEIR02-04)fortheOtayRanchFreewayCommercialSectionalPlanningArea(SPA)Plan- PlanningArea12.PursuanttotheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityActStateGuidelinesSection 15162, a Second Addendum to FEIR 02-04 has been prepared for the project. Environmental Determination TheDirectorofDevelopmentServiceshasreviewedtheproposedprojectforcompliancewiththe CaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct(CEQA)andhasdeterminedthattheprojectwasadequately coveredinpreviouslyadoptedFinalEnvironmentalImpactReportfortheOtayRanchFreeway CommercialSectionalPlanningArea(SPA)Plan-PlanningArea12(FEIR02-04) (SCH#1989010154).TheDevelopmentServicesDirectorhasdeterminedthatonlyminortechnical changesoradditionstothisdocumentarenecessaryandthatnoneoftheconditionsdescribedin Section15162oftheStateCEQAGuidelinescallingforthepreparationofasubsequentdocument haveoccurred;therefore,theDevelopmentServiceDirectorhaspreparedaSecondAddendumto FEIR 02-04. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION OnAugust10,2016,thePlanningCommissiontookactionandvoted5-0-2withtwoCommissioners being absent that the Council adopt the resolutions and the ordinance. City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 1 of 18 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 171 File#:16-0451, Item#: 4. DISCUSSION Addendum to FEIR 02-04 Section21002oftheCEQArequiresthatanenvironmentalimpactreportidentifythesignificant effectsofaprojectontheenvironmentandprovidemeasuresoralternativesthatcanmitigateor avoidthosesignificanteffects.TheFreewayCommercialSPAwasanalyzedinthepreviously adoptedFinalEnvironmentalImpactReportfortheOtayRanchFreewayCommercialSectional PlanningArea(SPA)Plan-PlanningArea12(FEIR02-04)(SCH#1989010154).TheFirst AddendumtotheFEIRwasapprovedfortheGeneralPlanandOtayRanchGeneralDevelopment PlanAmendmentsinMay2015.TheFirstAddendumtotheFEIRanalyzedtheimpactoftheGeneral PlanandGeneralDevelopmentPlanamendments,basedontheurban,mixedusedevelopment proposal.Asaresultofthisanalysis,thebasicconclusionsandimpactsidentifiedinFEIR02-04were determinedtonothavechanged.Thelanduseandpublicserviceimpactsarefoundtobelessthan significantforthecurrentSPAPlanandTentativeMapproposedprojectandwereadequately coveredinFEIR02-04.Therefore,inaccordancewithSection15164oftheCEQAGuidelines,the CityhaspreparedtheSecondAddendumtotheFEIR.TheSecondAddendumprovidesan environmentalanalysisofthepotentialimpactsassociatedwithimplementingtheproposedFreeway Commercial SPA Plan Amendment. Location, Existing Site Characteristics, and Ownership TheFreewayCommercialSPAPlanareaisgenerallylocatedsouthofOlympicParkway,northof BirchRoad,eastofStateRoute125andwestofEastlakeParkway(seeLocatorMap,Attachment1). ThisamendmentislimitedtotheFC-2portionoftheSPAPlan,locatedbetweenOlympicParkway andtheexistingOtayRanchTownCentermall.Oneofthetwoanticipatedhotelsiscurrentlyunder construction,inconformancewiththeexistingcommercialentitlement,andanticipatedtobe completed by spring of 2017. The remainder of the FC-2 site remains vacant and undeveloped. FC-2includesapproximately36acresundertwoownerships,VillageIITownCenter,LLCand SunRanch Capital Partners, LLC (see Locator Map, Attachment 1). Existing General Plan, SPA Plan Land Use Designations and Land Use City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 2 of 18 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 172 File#:16-0451, Item#: 4. Project Description Theproposedproject(“Project”)isanurbanmixedusemulti-familyneighborhoodwithamenity-rich openspace.Itwillincludeupto600multi-familyresidentialunits,300hotelrooms,15,000square- feetofmixedusegroundfloorretail,andatwo-acrehighlyamenitizedpublicpark.Itisconsistent withtheGPandGDPgoalsandvisionforFreewayCommercialNorthandisintendedtoenhance living,working,shopping,andtransitoptionsintheFreewayCommercialNorthwhileincreasing residents’opportunitiesforsocialinteractionandrecreation.Theproposedamendmenttothe FreewayCommercialSPAPlanimplementstheChulaVistaGPandOtayRanchGDPpolicy objectivesfortheFreewayCommercialNorth(i.e.provisionofhotelsandhighdensityresidentialwith ancillarycommercialinamixeduseurbancharactersettingthatincludesanurbanpark,GDPSec II.1.C). InconformancewiththeGPandGDP,theprojectproposesconvertingapproximately27acresof FreewayCommerciallandusetoMulti-FamilyResidential,2acresofFreewayCommercialtoMixed Use,and2acresofFreewayCommercialtoPublicParkuses.7.6acreswillremainFreeway City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 3 of 18 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 173 File#:16-0451, Item#: 4. Commercial use and will accommodate two hotels. TheHotelcornerissituatedalongOlympicParkway,westofTownCenterDriveformaximum visibilityfromtheSR-125andOlympicParkway.Twohotelsareanticipatedtobebuilt,providing148 and152roomseach,foratotalof300hotelroomsintheProject.Thecommercialcomponentofthe MixedUsedistrictwillbelocatedalongtheeastsideofTownCenterDrive,andwillcontainatleast 15,000square-feetofretailandgeneralcommercialspace.Thecommercialspacewillbeprovided onthegroundfloorwithresidentialabove,withactivefrontagetoTownCenterDrive.Oftheproposed 600dwellingunits,308areproposedeastofTownCenterDriveand292areproposedwestofTown CenterDrive.ResidentialEastwillconsistoffor-rentmulti-familyresidential,atthedensityof30 dwellingunitsperacre.ResidentialWestwillcontainfor-salehomes,andwillconsistoftwodistinct residentialproducts,bothattachedmulti-family.Thetownhomeproductwillprovide212unitsinthe formof8-and12-plexes.Threetofour-storytallbuildingswithindividualcharacterandmassingwill serveasabackdropforthecentrallylocatedPublicPark.Itwillcreatethedesiredurbanheightand aninterestingskylinethatwillbeviewedfromsurroundingneighborhoods.Thelowerdensity rowhomeproductwillconsistof80unitsandwillbethree-storyhigh3-and4-plexeswithprivateback yardsandupstairsdecks.At14dwellingunitsperacre(DU/ac),therowhomeswillprovideadesired balance with the 30 DU/ac apartments and 26 DU/ac townhomes. Threedifferenttypesofresidentialproductsensurediversityandaddaninterestanddistinctive charactertotheneighborhood.EachoftheneighborhoodswithintheProjectmakeupadense, walkablecommunitythatoffersmodernsmaller-scalelivingaccommodationswithinwalkingdistance tolocalshops,diningandserviceswithinthevillage,andtheimmediatesurroundingarea.It supportsanactivecommunitythatisbikeandpedestrian-friendlyandisinproximitytoavailable surrounding diverse amenities. Proposed Amendments ThefollowingisabriefsummaryoftheproposedamendmentstotheFreewayCommercialSPA Plan, Design Plan, and PC District Regulations. Amendapplicabletext,tables,andexhibitstoreflectchangesinzoningnecessarytoimplementthe mixedusezoningdistrictwith600dwellingunits,15,000square-feetofmixedusecommercialanda 2-acre park. 1.UpdatetheSPAPlantobeconsistentwiththeGP/GDPobjectivesandpoliciesregardingthe OtayRanchFreewayCommercialNorthasa“Highqualitymixed-usetransitsupportive developmentwithinFC-2withhotels,commercialretail,parkandhigh-densityusesthrougha cohesive,coordinateddesignthatintegrateswellwiththeFreewayCommercialSouth(FC-1) shopping center.” 2.Rezone FC-2 parcel from Freeway Commercial to Mixed Use. 3.UpdatetheSiteUtilizationPlanfromanentirelyCommerciallanduseinFC-2toCommercial Hotel, Multi-Family Residential, Mixed Use, and Public Park. 4.Update the Project obligations and standards arising from the addition of Residential land use: a.DevelopmentConcept:updatetheLandUsePattern;addDensityTransferprovisions; provideanAffordableHousingPlan;describethenewUrbanandLandscapeDesign concepts. City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 4 of 18 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 174 File#:16-0451, Item#: 4. b.Mobility: update the Circulation exhibit; provide new Street Sections. c.Grading: update the Storm Water quality requirements. d.Parks,RecreationandOpenSpace:includePark,OpenSpace,andPreserve Conveyance obligation based on the projected 600 dwelling units. e.DevelopmentPhasing:addResidentialandMixedUsecomponentstotheexisting Commercial phasing schedule; update the Phasing exhibit. f.PublicFacilities:updatethePotableandRecycledWaterandSewerdemand projections;updatestudentgenerationratesandtheresultingSchoolobligations; updatethePoliceandFireServicesinformation;includetheCPFobligationof2.2acres and implementation procedure. g.DesignPlan:addaConceptualSitePlanexhibitforFC-2andupdatetheDesign ReviewPlanningAreasfortheFC-2parcel.SpecificDesignGuidelinesfortheProject are provided in the new Master Precise Plan. h.PCDistrictRegulations:UpdateLandUseDistrictdefinitionsandexhibit;updatethe PermittedUsematrixforthenewResidential,andMixedUsedistricts;updateProperty DevelopmentStandardsforthenewuses,includinglotandbuildingstandards,parking requirements, common and private open space provisions. ANALYSIS 1.SPA Plan Amendment Otay Ranch Freeway Commercial SPA Plan Amendment TheFreewayCommercialSPAPlanadoptedin2004andsubsequentlyamendedin2007includes regulationsforboththeFreewayCommercialNorth(FC-2)andFreewayCommercialSouth(FC-1) sites.TheproposedamendmentaddresseschangestotheFreewayCommercialNorthsiteonly.The applicantisproposingamendmentstotheSPAPlaninordertodevelop600multi-familyresidential units,mixeduseformatcommercialconsistingof15,000square-feetofgroundfloorcommercial retail,anda2-acrehighlyamenitizedurbanpark.TheSPAPlanamendmentwouldmakethe document consistent with the GP and GDP as amended in May, 2015. TheproposednewSiteUtilizationPlanreflectsthelocationoftheusesandcorrespondingacreages intheplanningarea.Commercialusesareproposedtobesitedwheretheywillhaveoptimalvisibility andaccessibility.Twohotelswillbelocatedatthenorthwestcornerofthesitewithdirectvisibility fromtheSR-125andOlympicParkway.Groundfloorretailandgeneralcommercialwillbelocated alongtheeastsideofTownCenterDrivetoactivatethepedestrianpromenade.Residentialuses spanbothsidesofTownCenterDrive,andareinproximitytotransit,shopping,entertainment, employmentandadjacentusessuchasschoolsandtrails.Ahighly-amenitized2-acrePublicPark locatedinthecenteroftheProjectalongthewestsideofTownCenterDriveisintendedtolinkallof the uses together. TheamendedSPAPlanwouldallowforareductionoftheLandscapeBufferalongOlympicParkway, alongtheprojectfrontagebetweenSR-125andEastlakeParkway,from75to30feetwithDesign ReviewapprovalbythePlanningCommission.OlympicParkwayisdesignatedasaScenicRoadway intheGP.TheGPdefinesanurbansceniccorridorasaroutethattraversesanurbanarea,withthe sceniccorridorofferingaviewofattractiveandexcitingurbanscenes.Thenatureoftheproposed Projectatthislocationismoreurbanthantherestofthesceniccorridorcontinuingeasttowardthe OlympicTrainingCenter.AmixeduseresidentialbuildingwithgroundfloorcommercialfrontagewillCity of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 5 of 18 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 175 File#:16-0451, Item#: 4. OlympicTrainingCenter.Amixeduseresidentialbuildingwithgroundfloorcommercialfrontagewill haveaprominentlocationatthecornerofOlympicParkwayandTownCenterDrive,creatingan activatedpedestrianenvironment.Urban-typethreetofourstoryresidentialbuildingswithenhanced frontageswithagenerousamountofwindows,balconies,andpedestrianstoopswilllinethesidewalk on Olympic Parkway, east of Town Center Drive. Theproposed30-footbufferinFC-2musthavethefollowingfeatures:itmustbeheavilylandscaped; theurbanenvironmentalongthesceniccorridorwillbeactivatedwithplazasinopeningsbetween buildings;providepedestrianconnectionsfromOlympicParkwaytotheprojectandprovide commercialusesalongTownCenterDrive;andthelandscapingmustbeattractive.TheSPAPlan containsExhibit5thatshowsaconceptualcross-sectionfortheproposedreducedenhancement buffer at this location. Parks, Open Space, & Trails BasedonChulaVistaMunicipalCodeChapter17.10,theProjectgenerates4.7acresofParkland AcquisitionandDevelopment(PAD)obligation.PerSection5.3oftheProjectDevelopment AgreementexecutedonJune16,2015,theapplicantwillsatisfythisobligationbyprovidingand developing2.0acresofonsiteparkland.In-lieufeesequivalenttotheremaining2.7acresof parklandacquisitionanddevelopmentwillbeusedtofurtheramenitizethe2-acrepark,whichwillbe constructedbytheApplicantandturnedovertotheCityasaturnkeyfacility.Thisapproachis consistentwiththemechanismusedtoconstructsimilarhighly-amenitizedurbanparksinthenearby Milleniaproject.Thefollowingtablesummarizestheplannedparkfunding,assumingcurrentPAD Feerates.ActualfundstobeexpendedwillbesubjecttothePADFeeinplaceatthetimethepark obligation comes due per the Development Agreement. Description Acquisition Development Total Total PAD Requirement, Acres 4.7 4.7 Less Permanent Easement, Acres (2.0)- Remaining Obligation, Acres 2.7 4.7 Remaining Obligation, MF DUs (128 DU/ 1 Acre)345.60 601.60 Current In-Lieu Fee, per MF DU $ 9,408 $ 3,980 Current In-Lieu Fee Obligation, Total $ 3,251,405 $ 2,394,368 $ 5,645,773 TheApplicantisgrantinga2-acrepropertytotheCityinapermanenteasementforpublicuse.Per theDevelopmentAgreement,theDeveloperisresponsibleforallcostsofmaintainingthepark.Prior toapprovalofthefirstfinalmapfortheproject,aCommunityFacilitiesDistrict(CFD)orotherfunding mechanism will be established to fund the perpetual maintenance of the park. PertheOtayRanchResourceManagementPlan(RMP),parcelFC-2hasapreserveland conveyance obligation of 43.5 acres that will be conveyed upon approval of the first final map. Community Purpose Facilities CVMCSection19.48requirestheprovisionof1.39acresoflandper1,000personsbezonedfor CommunityPurposeFacilities(CPF)whencreatingaSPAPlan.TheProjectwillrequire2.2acresof CPF.InaccordancewiththeprovisionsofSection5.3.2oftheexecutedandrecordedDevelopment AgreementforFreewayCommercialNorth,theapplicantmaysatisfyitsCPFrequirementbytheCity of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 6 of 18 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 176 File#:16-0451, Item#: 4. AgreementforFreewayCommercialNorth,theapplicantmaysatisfyitsCPFrequirementbythe provisionoftheCPFlandoffsite,atthediscretionoftheDevelopmentServicesDirector.The required2.2acresofCPFwillbeprovidedforwithina6.5acresiteavailabletobeconvertedin Village 7. Freeway Commercial PC District Regulations Amendments ThePCDistrictRegulationsfunctionasthezoningregulationsfortheOtayRanchFreeway CommercialSPA.ThePCDistrictRegulationswouldbeamendedtoincludethenewlanduses.FC- 2isproposedtobedividedinto3sub-landusedistricts(zones):Hforhotels,RMforMulti-Family Residential,MUforMixed-Use,andPforPark.TheLandUseDistrictexhibithasbeenrevisedto reflecttheselandusedistricts.TheamendedPermittedUseMatrixandPropertyDevelopment Standardscontaintheregulationsfortheresidentialandmixed-usecommercial/residentialuse districts. ThePCDistrictRegulationsidentifytheparkingstandardsforeachlandusecategory.Freeway CommercialNorthwillbeadoptingthecurrentlyutilizedOtayRanchparkingstandardswithinVillage 2, with the following modifications that require all parking to be provided on-site. ThePCDistrictregulationsdonotallowresidentialparkingonTownCenterDrive.Allresidential parkingwillbeprovidedon-site.SimilarlytotheOtayRanchstandards,tandemparkingisallowedfor residentialusesasaspace-efficientsolution,inordertoreducethebuildingfootprintsandachieve thedesiredmassingandhigherdensity,consistentwiththeintentandvisionoftheSPAPlanforthe projectasahighintensityurbanenvironment.ThePCDistrictRegulationscounta2-cartandem spaceas1.75spaces;theremaining0.25spaceswouldbeprovidedascommonunassignedspaces on-site, including all required guest parking. Freeway Commercial SPA Plan Design Guidelines Amendments TheDesignGuidelinessetforthdesignparametersthatpertaintositeplanning,landscape architecture,architectureandsignageforalldevelopmentswithinPlanningArea12.TheDesign Guidelinescontainillustrationsandrequirementstoimplementthedesignconceptspresented therein.TheFreewayCommercialNorthDesignPlanwasupdatedtoincludetheproposed residentialandmixeduseportionoftheproject.Specificdesignguidelinesforresidentialandmixed- use commercial/residential are provided in the Master Precise Plan. City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 7 of 18 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 177 File#:16-0451, Item#: 4. Public Facilities Finance Plan (PFFP) and Fiscal Impact Analysis (FIA) APFFPhasbeenpreparedasasupplementaldocumenttotheoriginalPFFPdatedApril1,2003. TheFreewayCommercialNorthSupplementalPFFPforthisprojectanalyzestheproposed600-unit addition,anypotentialimpactsonpublicfacilitiesandservices,andidentifiesthefacilities,phasing andtimingtriggersfortheprovisionoffacilitiesandservicestoservetheproject,consistentwiththe City’sQualityofLifeThresholdStandards.ThePFFPdescribesindetailthecost,financing mechanismandtimingforconstructionofnecessarypublicfacilitiesbasedontheproject’sproposed phasing. Thepublicfacilitiesneededtoservetheprojectwillbeguaranteedbyplacingconditionsofapproval ontheTentativeMap,requiringpaymentofvariousfeesatthebuildingpermitstage,and/or continuingpaymentofbondpaymentsundertheapprovedCommunityFacilitiesDistrictstofinance ormaintainpublicfacilities.ThePFFPincludedananalysisoftransportation,drainage,water,sewer, fire, schools, libraries, parks, and fiscal impacts of the project. ThesupplementalPFFPalsoincludesaFiscalImpactAnalysis(FIA)oftheFreewayCommercial Northplanandphasingprogram.TheFreewayCommercialNorthSupplementalFIAhasbeen preparedusingtheCity’sFiscalImpactFrameworktoprovideaconsistentevaluationwiththoseof other Chula Vista SPAs. BasedontheSupplementalFIAandtheassumptionscontainedtherein,boththecurrentlyapproved plan(i.e.base)andtheproposedProjectareexpectedtogenerateapositivenetfiscalimpactof$1.9 millioninYears0&1.Noconstructionisassumedtooccuronthesiteintheinitialtwoyearsofthe FIAmodel.FromYear2throughbuildout,boththebaseandproposedProjectareestimatedto generate more revenues than expenditures, resulting in a net positive fiscal impact to the City. ThecurrentlyadoptedSPAplan(base)isestimatedtogenerateannualrevenuesof$4.1millionand expensesof$2.1million,resultinginanetpositivefiscalimpacttotheCityof$2.0millionannuallyat build-out.TheproposedProjectisestimatedtogeneraterevenuesof$4.8millionandexpensesof $2.3million,resultinginanetpositivefiscalimpacttotheCityof$2.5millionannuallyatbuild-out. Overall,theproposedProjectisestimatedtonetapproximately$0.5millionperyearmoretotheCity thanthebaseplan.TheproposedProject’simprovedfiscalperformanceischieflyattributableto Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenues expected to result from development of the hotels. WhilehotelusesareallowedunderthecurrentFCentitlement,theoriginalFIAfortheFreeway CommercialSPAPlandidnotassumehotelgeneratedrevenuesbecausetherewerenoassurances thathotelswouldbedevelopedoneithertheFC-1orFC-2sites.Thepreviouslyapproved DevelopmentAgreementfortheproposedProjectprovidesfinancialassurancesanddevelopment thresholdstoensuretheCityreceivestheanticipatedtaxrevenuecommensuratewiththephasingof thehotelandresidentialdevelopment.ThefindingsintheFIAshowthathotelusesgenerate revenuesfortheCityatahigherratethangeneralcommercial,andtheproposedprojectwill generate over a half million dollars more than the base, as described above. Affordable Housing Plan TheChulaVistaGeneralPlanHousingElementcontainsobjectives,policiesandactionprogramsto accomplishkeyaffordablehousingobjectives.Keyamongtheseistheaffordablehousingpolicy, whichrequiresthatresidentialdevelopmentwithfifty(50)ormoredwellingunitsprovideaminimum of10%ofthetotaldwellingunitsforlowandmoderateincomehouseholds;one-halfoftheseunitsCity of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 8 of 18 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 178 File#:16-0451, Item#: 4. of10%ofthetotaldwellingunitsforlowandmoderateincomehouseholds;one-halfoftheseunits (5%ofthetotalproject)beingdesignatedforlowincome,andtheotherhalf(5%)tomoderateincome households. Basedontheentitlementof600residentialunitsinFC-2,30low-incomeand30moderate-income affordableunitsarerequired.Theseaffordablehousingunitsmaybelocatedeitherwithinoroutside the plan area. AHousingandDevelopmentAgreementbetweentheCityofChulaVistaandBaldwinandSonswas executedonApril21,2016,whichallowstheDevelopertosatisfyitsaffordablehousingobligation fromcreditsearnedbythedevelopmentofoff-siteathletehousingattheOlympicTrainingCenter. TheProjectmaysatisfyitsaffordablehousingobligationthroughacombinationofon-siteandoff-site units. Water Conservation Plan TheCityofChulaVista’sGrowthManagementOrdinancerequiresthatalldevelopmentof50unitsor moreprepareaWaterConservationPlan(WCP)aspartoftheSPAPlan.Thisplanpresentsareview ofpresentlyavailabletechnologiesandpracticesthatresultinwaterconservation.Thisplanidentifies waterconservationmeasuresthatwillbeincorporatedintotheprojectasaconditionofapprovalon theSPAPlan.AWCP,consistentwiththecurrentCitystandards,hasbeenpreparedasapartofthe proposed project. This WCP covers additional land uses proposed by this amendment. TheFC-2WCPrequiresthatresidentialdevelopmentprovidehotwaterpipeinsulation,pressure reducingvalvesandwaterefficientdishwashers.Non-residentialmeasuresincludehotwaterpipe insulation,pressurereducingvalvesandcompliancewithDivision5.3oftheCaliforniaGreen BuildingStandardsCode.Inaddition,tocomplywiththeCity’scurrentwaterconservation requirements,thedeveloperwillalsoincludedualflushtoiletsandwaterefficientlandscaping. Together these measures annually save approximately 8,850 gallons per multi-family unit. TheWCPalsoprovidesadiscussionofthelocalwaterconservationrequirementsrelatedtotheuse ofreclaimedwater.TheCityofChulaVistaLandscapeManualrequirestheuseofrecycledwaterfor irrigationofparks,medianlandscaping,openspaceslopes,andcommonlandscapedareas.The LandscapeManualalsorequiressomedroughttolerantplantselectioninthelandscapingplanand theuseofevapotranspirationcontrollersforparksandcommonlandscapedareas.Additionally,the LandscapeWaterConservationOrdinanceisexpectedtoreduceoutdoorwaterconsumptiondueto thesettingofstrictwaterbudgetsonCityapprovedlandscapeplansthatmustnotbeexceeded.The useofrecycledwaterandotherwaterconservationmeasuresisexpectedtoreducepotablewater usage by 46,936 gallons per day (gpd), or 21%. Theproposedconservationmeasuresoutlinedabove,andidentifiedintheFC-2WCP,complywith theCityofChulaVista’sGrowthManagementOrdinanceandthegoals,objectivesandpoliciesofthe City’sGeneralPlanandtheOtayRanchGDP.SeetheWaterConservationPlansectionoftheSPA Plan. Air Quality Improvement Plan TheCityhasincludedaGrowthManagementElement(GME)initsGeneralPlan.Oneofthestated objectivesoftheGMEistoactivelyplantomeetfederalandstateairqualitystandards.This objectiveisincorporatedintotheGME’sactionprogram.Inaddition,theCity’sGrowthManagementCity of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 9 of 18 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 179 File#:16-0451, Item#: 4. objectiveisincorporatedintotheGME’sactionprogram.Inaddition,theCity’sGrowthManagement Ordinance(CVMC19.09)requiresthatanAirQualityImprovementPlan(AQIP)bepreparedforall majordevelopmentprojects(50dwellingunitsorgreater)aspartoftheSPAPlanprocess.Anew AQIPhasbeenpreparedbyCriterionPlannersfortheFC-2SPAAmendmenttocomplywiththe City’s current AQIP Guidelines. ThepurposeoftheAQIPistoprovideananalysisofairpollutionimpactsthatwouldresultfrom developmentandtodemonstratehowtheprojectdesignreducesvehicletrips,maintainsorimproves trafficflow,reducesvehiclemilestraveledandreducesdirectorindirectgreenhousegasemissions. FC-2isconsideredasaninfillprojectsitewhoseAQIPvaluederivesinlargepartfromexisting surroundingusesinterfacingwiththeprojectsite.InaccordancewiththeAQIPGuidelinesthatallow forutilizationofother“equivalent”alternativeprogramssuchasLEEDNDtodemonstratecompliance withINDEXthresholds,AQIPanalysisforFC-2wascompletedusingtheLEED-NDratingsystemin lieu of INDEX indicators. BasedontheFC-2projectsitecharacteristics,proposeddevelopmentplan,andsurrounding conditions,theAQIPanalysisfindsthatFC-2scorestheequivalentof56points,whichwouldearna SilvercertificationundertheLEED-NDratingsystem.CriterionPlanningwastheexpertconsultant, whoinconjunctionwithcitystaffworkedontheoriginaldevelopmentoftheINDEXindicator thresholdsfortheCity.BasedontheirexperiencewithINDEXmodelandcertifyingover100LEED- NDprojectsnationally,theconsultantconcludedthatthebaseNDcertificationof40pointsisthe functionalequivalentofINDEXindicatorthresholds.Ascoreof56pointsexceedstheINDEX thresholds, and demonstrate clear AQIP compliance. Fire Protection Plan (FPP) AsdeterminedbytheFireChief,thisprojectdoesnotrequireanFPPbecauseitisconsideredan infill site that is surrounded by manmade slopes and development. 2.Tentative Map TheTentativeSubdivisionMapproposestosubdivide2existinglotstotalingapproximately36.2 acresinto13lots(3multi-family,2openspace,2hotellots,3mixeduse,1park,1privatestreet,1 remainderparcel).Thetotalnumberofdwellingunitsproposedis600(Eastresidential:lot3-140 units,lot4-93units,lot5-88units;andWestResidential:lot6-79units,lot7-140units,lot9-60 units). Project Access: AccesstotheprojectareaisprovidedfromOlympicParkwayviaTownCenterDriveandaprivate roadeastofTownCenterDrive.PrivateStreetAandHotelDriveserveastheprimaryaccesspoints alongwithotherinternalprivatestreetswhichwillprovideaccesswithintheprojectarea.Allstreets willconformtotheguidelinessetforthintheFreewayCommercialSPAPlanandCityofChulaVista street design guidelines. Subdivision Design: Thesubdivisiondesignconsistsofthree(3)multi-familyresidentiallots,three(3)mixeduse commercial-multi-familyresidentiallots,two(2)hotellots,two(2)openspacelots,one(1)public park,one(1)privatestreet,andone(1)remainderparcel.Thesubdivisionisplannedtoallowa City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 10 of 18 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 180 File#:16-0451, Item#: 4. maximum of 600 residential units. Grading: TheFC-2siteisatriangularly-shapedlotboundedbyOlympicPkwyonthenorth,SR-125onthe west,OtayRanchTownCenterMallonthesouth,andEastlakePkwyontheeast.PA-12wassheet- gradedin2005.Thetopographyofthesiteisrelativelyflatwithelevationsofabout620’abovemean sealevel(AMSL).Descendingslopesexistonthewestwithamaximumheightofapproximately30’. Drainageisdirectedtoadesiltingbasinlocatednorthoftheproperty.Thepropertywillbegradedfor 4sheet-gradedparcelsforfuturemulti-familyresidentialdevelopmentsandapark.Thepropertywill alsoincludeawaterqualitybasinonthewestandaccommodateutilities,driveways,parkingareas, andlandscaping.TheApplicantmustobtainaLandDevelopmentPermitpriortobeginningany earthworkactivitiesatthesiteandbeforeissuanceofbuildingpermitsinaccordancewithChulaVista MunicipalCodeChapter15.05.TheApplicantmustalsosubmitgradingplansinconformancewith the City's Subdivision Manual and the City's Development Storm Water Manual requirements. 3.Master Precise Plan AnewMasterPrecisePlan(MPP)forFreewayCommercialNorthisrequiredbytheFreeway CommercialSPAPlan(PCDistrictRegulations,III.E.1)andprovidestheentitlementbridgelinking theapprovedpoliciesandlandusedesignationsoftheFreewayCommercialSPA/DesignPlanwith subsequentproject-levelapprovalswithintheFreewayCommercialNorthMPParea.Itservesasa frameworkdocumentbywhichfuture“IndividualPrecisePlans”willbeevaluatedforcompliancewith theapprovedMPPconceptsthatencompassstreetscapeandlandscapedesign,signs,and architectural and lighting guidelines. TheMPPsupplementstheDesignPlan.Itprovidesdesigndirectionandestablishesadetailed frameworkforbuildingdesignandsiting;pedestrian/vehicle/transitaccess;urban character/architecture/landscapearchitecture;andlighting/signage/streetfurnishings.Itcontains specificmandatorycriteriaandgeneraldesignrecommendationsforestablishingaunifyingdesign theme in FC-2 and for achieving the planning area’s intended character and use mix. TheMPPprovisionsareintendedtoensurethatFC-2isdevelopedasadiverseurbancenterina walkableurbanframeworkwithaqualitypublicrealm.Itpromotesanactivecommunitythatisbike andpedestrian-friendlyandoffersdiverseamenities.AbstractSpanishwithelementsof ContemporaryCaliforniaisthedefiningarchitecturalstylelinkingtheentireprojecttogether.This moderndesignwithcleanerlinesemphasizesbuildingmassing,interlockingvolumes(i.e.scale), mixtureofmaterialsonprimaryfacadesandastrongconnectiontotheoutdoors.Threeseparate design checklists are included for each of the Hotel, Mixed Use, and the Residential plan areas. 4.Design Review TheprojectincludesaDesignReviewpermit(DR16-0030)fora212-unitmulti-familydevelopment, whichisconsistentwithandimplementstheintentanddesignvisioncontainedintheFreeway Commercial North Design Plan and Master Precise Plan (MPP). City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 11 of 18 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 181 File#:16-0451, Item#: 4. Project Site Characteristics: The8.14-acreprojectsiteislocatedwithinneighborhoodRMatthewesternportionofFreeway CommercialNorth,onavacant,flatandmassgradedparcelwestofTownCenterDrive.Itis borderedbytwofuturehotelsonthenorth,apublicparkandmixedusecommercialontheeast, Otay Ranch Town Center mall on the south, and SR-125 and multi-family residential on the west. Summary of Surrounding Land Uses: Project Description: Themulti-familyresidentialproject,called“Suwerte,”proposes212attachedforsaleunitsconsisting of21separatebuildings:teneight-plexesandeleventwelve-plexes.Theunitswillbethreetofour story,2to4bedroomseachwithatwo-cargarage.Homesrangeinsizefrom1,173to2,272square- feet.Eachunithasasecond-floorbalcony.Someoftheunitsalsofeatureground-floorporchesand third-floor decks. Six floor plans are proposed. Compliance with Development Standards: ThefollowingProjectDataTableshowsFreewayCommercialSPAdevelopmentregulationsalong with the applicant’s proposal to meet said requirements: City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 12 of 18 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 182 File#:16-0451, Item#: 4. City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 13 of 18 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 183 File#:16-0451, Item#: 4. Compliance with Freeway Commercial SPA Design Guidelines StaffisutilizingtheOtayRanchFreewayCommercialSPAPlannedCommunityDistrictRegulations andtheFreewayCommercialNorthMasterPrecisePlantoevaluatethisproject.Theapplicable designcriteriaarefirstpresentedinitalicsfollowedbystaffdiscussion,analysisandstaff recommendation in non-italics. Site Planning and Building Placement/Orientation: • Encourage multi-modal street design. Enhance the pedestrian and cyclist experience. •Createenhancedpedestrianpathsalongstreets,throughparkinglots,andlandscapedareas, courtyards,andpaseostoconnectresidentstotheTownCenterPark,nearbyamenitiesandother parts of the community. •Interiorcourtyards,paseos,promenades,andplazasareencouragedtoprovidemoreopportunities for social gathering and pedestrian connections throughout the community. TheFreewayCommercialSPADesignPlanandFreewayCommercialNorthMasterPrecisePlan (MPP)includeguidelinesandpoliciesasshownabove,whichstipulatesthatmulti-familyresidential buildingscontributetothepedestrian-orienteddesignandurbancharacterofthecommunity.The pedestrianfeaturesthroughoutthesitemeettheintentoftheFreewayCommercialSPADesignPlan as described below. Bothpassiveandactiveopenspaceareashavebeenprovidedthroughouttheneighborhoodanda publicparkisdirectlyadjacentontheeastsidefortheresidentstoenjoy.Anetworkofenhanced pedestrianpathsalongthestreetsandbetweenbuildingsandmotorcourtsconnectresidentsto TownCenterDriveandouttothemallonthesouthandOlympicParkwayonthenorth.Alarge commonandactivepaseoareaislocatedinthecenteroftheprojectandismadeupofseveral programelements.Itincludesabarbequeareawithtablesandseatingunderneathatrellis;flexible uselawnspacewithdecorativeboulderseating;outdoorpingpongtable;exteriorloungefurniture surroundedbyraisedplanters,movablefurniturebyanexteriorfireplace;abocceballcourt;andtwo children’splaystructuresfordifferentagegroups.AbikerackisprovidedbytheBBQarea. Additionally,adogparkisproposedatthesouthedgeofthesite,nexttotheBRTfrontagewalkway. Apoolandspawithcabanas,agasfirepit,andarestroomfacilityandshowersislocatedinthe southwestcornerofthesite.Theseamenitiesareprovidedforresidentsandpromotepedestrian activities and interaction. BuildingshavebeenorientedtofrontontothestreetsandthefuturePark,viafrontstoops,porches, largewindowsanddecksthatprovideforapedestrianconnection,consistentwiththebuildingsiting polices and guidelines of the Freeway Commercial SPA Design Plan and MPP. WhilepedestrianaccessisasignificantfeatureinFreewayCommercialNorth,increasedvehicular accessisalsoimportantinordertoofferavarietyofwaystoaccessdifferentareas.Dispersionof automobiletrafficalsohastheeffectofmakingareasmorepedestrianfriendlyascarsand City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 14 of 18 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 184 File#:16-0451, Item#: 4. automobiletrafficalsohastheeffectofmakingareasmorepedestrianfriendlyascarsand pedestrianshavelessdirectinteraction.SuwerteprovidestwovehicularaccesspointsthroughPublic Street A on the north and Private Street A on the south. •Includeprimaryarchitecturalgatewayelementsonthebuilding’scornerattheintersectionofTown Center Drive and the Otay Ranch Town Center Mall parking lot entry. BuildingsatthecornerofTownCenterDriveandtheMalllooproadareorientedtowardsthestreet andcontainprimaryarchitecturalelementsincludingcoveredporches,steelcanopiesoverwindows, decorative roof tiles and shaped stucco parapets. •Providesecondaryvillagelandscapeaccents,suchasspecialtreesandlandscaping,lighting,or publicartalongAStreet.Designsurroundingbuildingsandopenspacestocreateasenseofplaceat this node. BuildingsalongPrivateStreetAincorporatepedestrianscalearchitecturalandlandscapeelements, such as generously landscaped walkways, arched entry features and small outdoor plazas. Architectural Theme: •Buildingsshallusesimplemassingformsthatconveysolidconstructiontechniques.Thedesignof allfrontorpedestrian-orientedbuildingelevationsshallclearlyconveyadistinctbase,middle,and cornice feature. •Buildingmassingshallbebrokenupsubtlyintosmallerunitstoengagethestreetscapewith pedestrian-scaled features. •Elevationsshallbearticulatedtoreducethebox-likeappearanceandvisualimpactofrepetitive rooflines. •Inlargerbuildingsorgroupsofbuildings,massingshallbeaccentedwithpronouncedhorizontalor verticalmassingfeatures.Thismayincludeatowerelement,verticalstairelement,horizontal colonnadeorhorizontalsuccessionofporchesortrellisfeatures,acolonnade,projectingeaves, accented vertical parapet or offset parapets, or similar design features. •Large,uninterruptedwallplanesareprohibited.Whereentries,windows,glazing,orother articulatingfeaturesarenotfeasible,elevationsshallbebrokenupwiththeuseofwallplaneoffsets, change in materials, and/or change in color. Theprojectdesignmeetstherequirementsabove.Theproject’sarchitecturalstyleis “Contemporary/AbstractSpanish.”Buildingfacadeswithstuccofinishprovideinterestand articulationthroughundulationinbuildingmassing,variationsinheight,profile,androofform. Recessedandprojectingbays,diversityofwindowsizeandshapereinforcethepedestrianscaleand qualityofstreet.Theprimaryfacadesfacingthestreetsincludewoodtrellises,steelcanopiesover windows,decorativetiledroofsoverbaysections,horizontalstuccotrim,wroughtironbalcony City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 15 of 18 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 185 File#:16-0451, Item#: 4. windows,decorativetiledroofsoverbaysections,horizontalstuccotrim,wroughtironbalcony railings,andpre-castdoorsurrounds.Sideandbackbuildingfrontagesincorporateprojecting balconies and side patios, shaped stucco parapets, decorative corbels and exterior lights. Garageaccessisprovidedfromthebackalleysandtwo-cargaragesareaccessedfromoneofthe twosidesofeachbuilding.Unitaccessisprovidedfromthefrontofthehomes.Unitsabovegarages have exterior entry stairs leading up to the second floor. Parking: TheFreewayCommercialSPAregulationsrequire2.33spacesperunit(whichincludes1covered andaminimumof0.33spacesperunitforguestparking)intheRMLandUsedistrict.Therequired parkingis494spaces(212x2.33spaces),andtheprojectprovides497spaces.Tandemparking garagesareallowed,howevera2-cartandemgaragecountsas1.75parkingspaces,andthe developerhastoprovideanadditional0.25spacepertandemgarageasunassignedexterior parking.Outofthe212units,84haveside-by-sidegaragesand128unitshavetandemgarages. Thereare168sidebysidegaragespaces(84x2spaces)and224tandemgarages(128x1.75 spaces)foratotalof392garagespacesintheproject.Theprojectprovides105exteriorcommon spaces,whichinclude70requiredguestspaces(212x0.33spaces)plusthe32requiredunassigned exteriorspacesfortandemparking(128x0.25spaces),including3extraunassignedexterior spaces. All required parking is provided onsite. Open Space: TheFreewayCommercialSPAregulationsrequire200squarefeetofCommonUsableOpenSpace perunitintheRMzoningdistrict.The212unitsinthisneighborhoodrequire42,400squarefeet(200 sq.ft.x212units)ofCommonUsableOpenSpace.Thisprojectprovides59,450squarefeet.The SPAPlanalsorequires80squarefeetofPrivateOpenSpacefortwo-bedroomunits(80sq.ft.x42 units)and100squarefeetfor3and4bedroomunits(100sq.ft.x170units)foratotalrequirement of 20,360 square feet. The project provides 27,882 square feet. Storage: Eachoftheresidentialunitswillprovidestoragespace.Storagespaceisrequiredforcondominium projectsattherateof200cu.ft.for2-bedroomunit,250cu.ft.for3bedroomunitand400cu.ft.for4 -bedroom unit. The project meets these requirements. DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT StaffhasreviewedthepropertyholdingsoftheCityCouncilandhasfoundthatnoCityCouncil Memberhaspropertyholdingswithin500feetoftheboundariesofthepropertywhichisthesubject ofthisaction.Consequently,thisitemdoesnotrepresentadisqualifyingrealproperty-related financialconflictofinterestunderCaliforniaCodeofRegulationsTitle2,section18702.2(a)(11),for purposes of the Political Reform Act (Cal. Gov. Code section 87100 et seq.). City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 16 of 18 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 186 File#:16-0451, Item#: 4. Inaddition,staffhasconductedadecisionmakerconflictofinterestreviewconcerningCityCouncil MemberMiesenandhasdeterminedthatapotentialconflictofinterestmayexistbecauseitmaybe reasonablyforeseeablethatafinancialeffectonabusinessentityinwhichCouncilMemberMiesen has a financial interest may be material. Staffisnotindependentlyaware,norhasstaffbeeninformedbyanyCityCouncilMember,ofany other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision maker conflict of interest in this matter. LINK TO STRATEGIC GOALS TheCity’sStrategicPlanhasfivemajorgoals:OperationalExcellence,EconomicVitality,Healthy Community,StrongandSecureNeighborhoodsandaConnectedCommunity.TheFreeway CommercialNorthProjectsupportstheEconomicVitalitygoal,particularlyCityInitiative2.1.3 (Promoteandsupportdevelopmentofqualitymaster-plannedcommunities).ThesubsequentSPA Planamendmentimplementationdocuments(theSPAPlan,MasterPrecisePlan,andTSM)support thedevelopmentofahigh-qualitymaster-plannedcommunity(asdescribedabove)withapark,jobs, transit,shopping,andotheramenities,allwithinwalkingdistanceforresidents.TheProject implementstheStrongandSecureNeighborhoodsStrategicgoalbyprovidingconstructionofa developmentprojectinamannerthatensurescodecompliance,publichealthandsafetyofthe community. CURRENT YEAR FISCAL IMPACT AllcostsassociatedwithpreparingandprocessingtheSPAPlanamendment,EIRAddendum, MasterPrecisePlan,TentativeSubdivisionMap,DesignReviewandallsupportingdocumentswere bornebythedeveloper,resultinginnonetfiscalimpacttotheGeneralFundortheDevelopment Services Fund. ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT Theproposedprojectresultsinanincreaseof600unitswithinFreewayCommercialNorth.The SupplementalFIAfortheFreewayCommercialNorthAmendmentestimatesthatduringYears0and 1 there would be no difference in fiscal impact between the base and proposed plan. ForYears2through10(buildout),whencomparingthebasetotheproposedProject,anincreaseto thenetpositivefiscalbenefittotheCitystartingatapproximately$390,000peryearandincreasingto over$536,000peryearisprojected,primarilyattributabletoTransientOccupancyTax(TOT) revenues generated by the two planned hotels. Ifapproved,theproposedProjectwillyieldanoverallestimated$2.5millionannualnetpositivefiscal impacttotheCityatbuildout,comparedtoanestimated$2.0millionundertheadoptedplan.The positivenetfiscalimpactresultingfromthischangewillcontinuetoaccruetotheCitywellbeyondthe 10-year buildout of the project. ATTACHMENTS 1:Locator Map 2:Planning Commission Resolution No. PCM-12-16, PCS-15-0007, IS-12-003 3:Disclosure Statement 4A - 4O:Freeway Commercial North SPA Amendments, Tentative Map CVT 15-0007, and City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 17 of 18 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 187 File#:16-0451, Item#: 4. Second Addendum to FEIR 02-04 5A - 5E: Engineering, Landscape, and Architectural plans for DR16-0030 Staff Contact: Stan Donn, AICP, Senior Planner City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 18 of 18 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 188 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION ORDINANCE NO. 2016- ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO OTAY RANCH FREEWAY COMMERCIAL SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS WHEREAS, the parcel, that is the subject matter of this Ordinance, is represented in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and for thepurpose of general description is located in the northern portion of Planning Area 12 of Otay Ranch; and WHEREAS, on September 24, 2015, a duly verified application was filed with the City of Chula Vista Development Services Department by Baldwin & Sons (Applicant) requesting approval of amendments to the Otay Ranch Freeway Commercial Sectional Planning Area Plan (PCM 12-16), including PlannedCommunity District Regulations; and WHEREAS, the project is intended to ensure that the Otay Ranch Freeway Commercial SPA Plan is prepared in accordance with the Otay Ranch General Development Plan (GDP) to implement the City of Chula Vista General Plan for Eastern Chula Vista to promote the orderly planning and long term phased development of the Otay Ranch GDP and to establish conditions, which will enable Otay Ranch Freeway Commercial to exist in harmony within the community; and WHEREAS, the property has beenthe subject matter of an amendment to the City’s General Plan and the Otay Ranch GDP approved on May 26, 2015 and adopted by City Council by Resolution No.2015-114; and WHEREAS, the Development Services Directorreviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the project was covered in the previously adopted Final Environmental Impact Report for the Otay Ranch Freeway Commercial Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan -Planning Area 12 (FEIR 02 - 04) (SCH #1989010154), and has determined that only minor technical changes or additions to this document are necessary and that none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of a subsequent document have occurred; therefore, the Development Services Director has prepared the Second Addendum to FEIR 02- 04; and WHEREAS, the Development Services Director set the time and place for a hearing on the project, and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property, at least 10 daysprior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6:00 p.m, August 10, 2016 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and the hearing was thereafter closed; and 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 189 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION WHEREAS,a duly noticed public hearing was scheduled before the City Councilof the City of Chula Vista to approve the project; and WHEREAS, the proceedings and any documents submitted to the City Councilas the decision makers shall comprise the entire record of the proceedings. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Chula Vista doeshereby order and ordain as follows: I.PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at their public hearing held on August 10, 2016and the Minutes and Resolutions resulting therefrom are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding. These documents, along with any documents submitted to the decision-makers, shall comprise the entire record of the proceedings for any CEQA claims. II.COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA Immediately prior to this action, the City Council reviewed and consideredthe Second Addendum to FEIR 02-04; III.ACTION The City Council hereby adopts an Ordinance approving the Otay Ranch Freeway Commercial SPA Planned Community District Regulationson file at the office of the City Clerk,finding that they are consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan, theOtay Ranch GDPand all other applicable plans; as setforth in Resolution PCM-12-16adopting the Freeway CommercialSPA PlanAmendment, and that the public necessity; convenience, general welfare andgood planning and zoning practice support their approval and implementation. IV.SEVERABILITY If any portion of this Ordinance, or its application toany person or circumstance,is for any reason held to be, invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional; by a courtof competent jurisdiction, that portion shall be deemed severable, and suchinvalidity, unenforceability or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity orenforceability of the remaining portions of the Ordinance, or its application to anyother person or circumstance. The City Council of the City of Chula Vista herebydeclares that it would have adopted each section, sentence, clause or phrase ofthis Ordinance, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections,sentences, clauses or phrases of the Ordinance be declared invalid,unenforceable or unconstitutional. V.CONSTRUCTION The City Council of the City of Chula Vista intendsthis Ordinance to supplement,not to duplicate or contradict, applicable state and federal law and this Ordinanceshall be construed in light of that intent. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 190 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION VI.EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from andafter its adoption. VII. PUBLICATION The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance andshall cause the same to be published or posted according to law. Presented by: _____________________ Kelly Broughton, FSALA Development Services Director Approved as to form by: _______________________ Glen R. Googins City Attorney 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 191 (8/1/04)(7/11/16)PCDISTRICT REGULATIONS Page 6 of 51 FC-1 Freeway Commercial Exhibit A Otay Ranch Freeway Commercial Land Use Districts Map 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 192 City of Chula Vista Staff Report File#:16-0452, Item#: 5. ORDINANCEOFTHECITYOFCHULAVISTAAMENDINGCHULAVISTAMUNICIPALCODE SECTION1.41.110TOREMOVETHEEXISTINGCIVILPENALTIESCAPANDDELETINGCHULA VISTAMUNICIPALCODESECTION5.66.030TOPERMITCRIMINALENFORCEMENTFOR VIOLATION OF CHAPTER 5.66(SECOND READING AND ADOPTION) RECOMMENDED ACTION Council adopt the ordinance. SUMMARY StaffrecommendsadoptionofanordinancethatwillamendChulaVistaMunicipalCodesection 1.41.110andchapter5.66toprovidetheCitywithmorerobustanddiversecodeenforcementtools, particularlyforuseinthecaseofpersistentcodeviolators.Theproposedordinancewouldeliminate thecaponcivilpenaltyassessment(currentlysetat$100,000)forallviolationsoftheMunicipal Code,andwouldpermittheCitytoprosecuteviolationsoftheCity’sbanonmedicalmarijuana dispensaries as criminal misdemeanors. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Environmental Notice Thisactivityisnota“Project”asdefinedunderSection15378oftheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQuality ActStateGuidelines;therefore,pursuanttoStateGuidelinesSection15060(c)(3)noenvironmental review is required. Environmental Determination TheproposedactivityhasbeenreviewedforcompliancewiththeCaliforniaEnvironmentalQuality Act(CEQA)andithasbeendeterminedthattheactivityisnota“Project”asdefinedunderSection 15378ofthestateCEQAGuidelinesbecauseitwillnotresultinaphysicalchangeinthe environment;therefore,pursuanttoSection15060(c)(3)oftheStateCEQAGuidelines,theactivityis not subject to the CEQA. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Not Applicable DISCUSSION Theproposedordinancewouldamendbothsection1.41.110andchapter5.66oftheChulaVista MunicipalCode(“CVMC”).Chapter5.66oftheCVMCwasenactedinSeptemberof2011.This chapterprohibitstheoperationofmedicalmarijuanadispensariesthroughouttheCityofChulaVista anddeclaresthatviolationofthechapterisapublicnuisancesubjecttoavailablelegalremedies. DespiteaclearprohibitionagainstmarijuanadispensariesintheCVMC,suchbusinessesopenand operateintheCityindefianceoflocallaw.TheCity’sCodeEnforcementandPoliceDepartmentsCity of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 193 File#:16-0452, Item#: 5. operateintheCityindefianceoflocallaw.TheCity’sCodeEnforcementandPoliceDepartments haveworkeddiligentlytoidentifysuchbusinesses;CodeEnforcementhasissuedNoticesof Violationandassessedadministrativecivilpenaltiesagainstpropertyownerswhopermitsuch violations on their land. TheCityisnotaloneinitsefforttoaddresstheproliferationofunlawfulmarijuanadispensaries.In SanDiegoCounty,thecitiesofVista,ElCajon,NationalCity,LemonGrove,Poway,Oceanside,and Carlsbad,amongothers,allworktoshutdowntheoperationofunlawfuldispensariesintheir respectivejurisdictions.TheCityofSanDiego,despitepermittingsomedispensaries,continuesto directsubstantialresourcesandefforttowardcivilandcriminalenforcementagainstalargenumber ofunlawfuldispensaries.TheChulaVistaCityAttorney’sOfficeactivelyworkswithotherjurisdictions to share best practices and information in addressing the operation of these unpermitted businesses. WhiletheCityofChulaVista’sCodeEnforcementDivision,withassistancefromthePolice Department,havesuccessfullyshutdownsomedispensarieswithoutneedforfurtherenforcement action,somemarijuanabusinessescontinuetooperatedespitenoticeoftheviolationandthe assessmentofadministrativecivilpenaltiesinamountsofupto$100,000.Asaresult,beginningin February,2015,theCityAttorney’sOfficebeganfilingcivillawsuitsagainstunlawfulmedical marijuanadispensariesandthepropertyownersuponwhoselandthedispensariesoperate.These civillawsuitsseekcourtordersprohibitingtheoperationoftheunlawfuldispensariesandrequest furthercivilpenalties,fees,andcostsagainstthedispensariesandpropertyowners.Anycivil penaltiesawardedbytheCourtmustbeinaccordancewiththeCVMC,includinganylimitations contained therein. Removal of the $100,000 Civil Penalties Cap CivilpenaltiesareauthorizedbytheCVMCinsection1.41.110.Section1.41.110currentlypermits penaltiesinanamountofupto$1,000perday,foramaximumof$100,000perstructureonaparcel ofproperty.TheCityofChulaVistaisuniqueinplacingacapontheamountofcivilpenaltiesthatcan beassessed,andthegenesisofthiscapisuncertain.Staffhasbeenunabletoidentifyanyother localjurisdictionwithasimilarmaximumcivilpenaltyamountoranylegalbasisforwhysuchacap would be required. Regardlessofthepresenceorabsenceofacivilpenaltiescap,theUnitedStatesandCalifornia constitutionsprovideprotectionagainstexcessivepenalties.Californiacaselawdictatesthatthe amountoffinesimposedmustbearaproportionalrelationshiptothepenalty’sdeterrentpurposeand thenatureofthemisconduct.Accordingly,finesinexcessof$100,000havebeenupheldaslawful when warranted by the facts and circumstances surrounding the assessment. Civilpenaltiescanbeaneffectivedeterrentagainstunlawfuldispensarieswhenthecostofviolating thelawbecomesgreaterthanthecostofdoingbusiness.JudgesinSanDiegoSuperiorCourthave awardedpenaltiesinexcessof$100,000inseveralpublicizedmarijuanadispensarycases. However,whenJudgesoftheSanDiegoSuperiorCourtassesspenaltiesincasesinvolvingviolation City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 194 File#:16-0452, Item#: 5. of the CVMC, they are hamstrung by the penalty cap codified in CVMC section 1.41.110. Staffrecommendsthatthepenaltycaplanguagecurrentlycontainedinsection1.41.110oftheCVMC bedeletedtopermittheCityand/ortheCourtstoassessfinesinexcessof$100,000when warranted.Federalandstateconstitutionalprotectionsagainstanypotentialexcessivefineswill remain in place. Allowing for Prosecution of Violations of City’s Dispensary Ban as Criminal Misdemeanors Inadditiontoremovingthepenaltycap,Staffrecommendsthatsection5.66.030bedeletedto providetheCitywithanadditionalenforcementtoolagainstunlawfuldispensaries.Section5.66.030 currentlyprohibitstheuseofcriminalenforcementremediesagainstpersonsfoundtobeinviolation ofchapter5.66.Whensection5.66.030wasenactedin2011,Californiacourtshadnotyetaffirmed thatmunicipalitiescouldcriminallyprosecutemunicipalcodeviolationsrelatedtomedicalmarijuana inCalifornia.Asenacted,section5.66.030wasintendedtoprotecttheCity’sordinancefroma challengeonthebasisofstatelawpreemption.Cities’authorityintheseareashassincebeen clarified. Othercities,includingthecitiesofLosAngeles,SanDiego,andVista,usecriminalprosecutionas onetoolinamulti-facetedapproachtoshutdownunlawfuldispensaries.Suchcriminalprosecutionis basedonaperson’sfailuretoabateapublicnuisance(inthiscase,theirviolationofthemunicipal code)andnotontheperson’sindividualuseorpossessionofmedicalmarijuana.TheCalifornia Courtofappealsin Kirbyv.CountyofFresno affirmedthatstatelawdoesnotprecludecriminal prosecutionforfailuretoabateapublicnuisanceregardingcommercialmarijuanaactivity. Accordingly,Staffrecommendsthatsection5.66.030bedeletedfromtheMunicipalCodetopermit theCitytocriminallyprosecuteviolationsofchapter5.66.Suchprosecutionwouldbepermittedin 5.66.040 subject to the extent expressly and validly preempted by state or federal law. ItisimportanttonotethattheproposedamendmentstotheCVMCarenotapanaceainthe enforcementeffortagainstunlawfulmarijuanabusinesses.WhiletheCityofVistainitiallyhad successusingcriminalprosecutionforviolationsoftheirdispensaryban,theyhavesincehada resurgenceofdispensaryviolatorsandarenowlookingtoaddcivillawsuits(similartothosecurrently filedbytheCityofChulaVista)totheirenforcementtoolkit.Staffanticipatesthatcriminal enforcementwillonlybeusedinthemostseriousandegregiouscases,andthatsuchenforcement wouldlikelyrequireadditionalstaffandresources.However,thecriminallegalprocesstypically movesmuchmorequicklythanthecivilprocess,andthepossibilityofacriminalconvictioncan persuadesomeresponsiblepartiestoceasetheirunlawfulconductor,perhaps,refusetoopenor rent to an unlawful dispensary in the first place. Conclusion/Recommendations Stateandfederallawsinvolvingmedicalmarijuanahaverapidlychangedandexpandedoverthe pastseveralyears.TheAdultUseofMarijuanaAct,whichproposestolegalizetheuseand possessionofrecreationalmarijuana,willbeontheballotinCaliforniathisNovember,butwillnot City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 195 File#:16-0452, Item#: 5. possessionofrecreationalmarijuana,willbeontheballotinCaliforniathisNovember,butwillnot eliminatetherightofalocaljurisdictiontoprohibitand/orregulatecommercialmarijuanaactivities. Theproliferationofmarijuanadispensarieshasrequiredlocalgovernmentstoremainvigilantand agile,adaptingtothenewchallengesanddemandstheseprofit-orientedbusinessespresent.Staff recommendsthattheMunicipalCodebeamendedtobothremovethecivilpenaltycapandtopermit criminalprosecutionagainstunlawfuldispensaries.TheseamendmentswillprovidetheCitywith additionalenforcementtoolsagainstentitieswhointentionallydisregardlocallawandviolatethe Municipal Code despite both notice and the opportunity to abate such violation. DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT Staffhasreviewedthedecisioncontemplatedbythisactionandhasdeterminedthatitisnotsite- specificandconsequently,the500-footrulefoundinCaliforniaCodeofRegulationsTitle2,section 18702.2(a)(11),isnotapplicabletothisdecisionforpurposesofdeterminingadisqualifyingreal property-relatedfinancialconflictofinterestunderthePoliticalReformAct(Cal.Gov'tCode§87100, et seq.). Staffisnotindependentlyaware,andhasnotbeeninformedbyanyCityCouncilmember,ofany other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision maker conflict of interest in this matter. LINK TO STRATEGIC GOALS TheCity’sStrategicPlanhasfivemajorgoals:OperationalExcellence,EconomicVitality,Healthy Community,StrongandSecureNeighborhoodsandaConnectedCommunity.Theamendmentsto section1.41.110andchapter5.66supporttheCity’sStrongandSecureNeighborhoodsgoal,asthey provide for more effective enforcement of the City’s Municipal Code provisions. CURRENT YEAR FISCAL IMPACT Thesubjectamendmentstosection1.41.110andchapter5.66resultinnocurrentyearfiscalimpact to the City. ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT Thesubjectamendmentstosection1.41.110andchapter5.66resultinnoongoingfiscalimpactto the City. ATTACHMENTS 1.Proposed amended CVMC 1.41.110 with strikeout underline text 2.Proposed amended CVMC 5.66 with strikeout underline text 3.Ordinance No. XXXX Staff Contact: Glen Googins; Megan McClurg City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 196 Chula Vista Municipal Code Page 1/3 The Chula Vista Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 3369, passed June 14, 2016. 1.41.110 Civil penalties. A. The council finds that there is a need for alternative methods of enforcement of the Chula Vista Municipal Code and applicable state codes. The council further finds that the assessment of civil penalties through an administrative hearing procedure for code violations is a necessary alternative method of code enforcement. The administrative assessment of civil penalties established in this section is in addition to any other administrative or judicial remedy established by law which may be pursued to address violations of the municipal code or applicable codes. B. Civil penalties may be assessed against a responsible party for continued violations of the municipal code or applicable state codes, whether of the same section or any combination, that reflect a continuing disregard for the requirements of such laws. The director may issue a notice and order to the responsible party assessing a civil penalty pursuant to this section. The civil penalty may be enforced against the responsible party as a lien pursuant to CVMC 1.41.140. C. Except for violations of land grading ordinances contained in Chapter 15.04 CVMC, civil penalties may be assessed at a daily rate not to exceed $1,000 per violation per day, and not to exceed a total of $100,000 per tax assessor’s parcel number in the case of unimproved real property or $100,000 per each structure against which violations have existed on a single tax assessor’s parcel number for any related series of violations.. D. The civil penalty for violations of land grading permits or land grading work done without the issuance of a permit shall be based on an estimate by the director of grading work performed. The rate of civil penalties shall be as follows: 1. Less than 250 cubic yards, but not meeting the requirements for an exemption from grading permit under CVMC 15.04.150: $1,000 per violation; 2. Two hundred fifty-one (251) to 500 cubic yards: $5,000 per violation; 3. Five hundred one (501) to 1,000 cubic yards: $10,000 per violation; 4. Over 1,001 cubic yards: $25,000 per violation; 5. In the event any individual, firm, company, developer or property owner causes a second violation of the land grading permit ordinance, either on the same property or different property and whether or not part of the same development, the rate of civil penalties shall be doubled. For third and subsequent violations, the rate of civil penalties shall be multiplied by a factor of four. E. Civil penalties under this section may be accrued retroactive to the date the violations were first discovered, as evidenced by the issuance of a notice of violation pursuant to CVMC 1.41.030, or any later date determined by the director. In determining the amount to be imposed on a daily rate, the director shall consider the following factors: 1. Duration of the violation; 2. Frequency or occurrence of the violation; 3. Frequency or occurrence of other violations during the period of accrual; 4. Seriousness of the violation in relation to its threat or impact upon public health, welfare or safety; 5. History of the violations; 6. Activity taken by the responsible party to obstruct or interfere with correction of the problem; 7. Good faith or bad faith efforts by the responsible party to comply; 8. The impact of the violation on the surrounding property and community; 9. The financial ability of the responsible party to have corrected the violation in a timely fashion. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 197 Chula Vista Municipal Code Page 2/3 The Chula Vista Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 3369, passed June 14, 2016. F. The director shall comply with Chapter 1.40 CVMC concerning notice of the proposed civil penalties and the right to a hearing to contest or confirm. Unless contested, the notice and order shall be final and be enforced pursuant to CVMC 1.41.160. If contested, the hearing examiner shall limit the hearing to the following issues: 1. Whether the responsible party maintained a use or condition on real property that violated the municipal code or state law on the dates specified; and 2. Whether the civil penalty assessed is consistent with the criteria expressed in subsection (E) of this section. The hearing examiner may, however, exercise discretion pursuant to CVMC 1.40.020(E) and increase or decrease the penalties assessed to a level determined to be supported by the evidence meeting the criteria under subsection (E) of this section. G. The director shall issue a final order based on the proceedings under subsection (E) of this section and establish a date for payment, following which date an enforcement lien shall be imposed upon the property. The imposition of an enforcement lien may be made a part of the proceedings and notice and order under CVMC 1.41.100 or this section. (Ord. 2718 § 3, 1998). 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 198 Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 5.66 MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES Page 3/3 The Chula Vista Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 3369, passed June 14, 2016. Chapter 5.66 MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES Sections: 5.66.010 Definitions. 5.66.020 Operation of medical marijuana dispensaries prohibited. 5.66.030 Violation – Penalty. 5.66.040 Public nuisance. 5.66.010 Definitions. “Medical marijuana dispensary” is any fixed facility or location where, under the purported authority of California Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5 et seq. or otherwise, marijuana is cultivated, made available, sold, transmitted, distributed, given or otherwise provided to, by, or among three or more persons for medical purposes. “Medical marijuana dispensary” shall not include the following uses, so long as such uses comply with this code, Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5 et seq., and other applicable law: 1. A clinic licensed pursuant to Chapter 1 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code. 2. A health care facility licensed pursuant to Chapter 2 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code. 3. A residential care facility for persons with chronic life-threatening illness licensed pursuant to Chapter 3.01 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code. 4. A residential care facility for the elderly licensed pursuant to Chapter 3.2 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code. 5. A hospice or a home health agency licensed pursuant to Chapter 8 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code. “Persons” shall include any individual or entity regardless of status as a qualified patient or primary caregiver. “Primary caregiver” shall be defined in the same manner as such term is defined in California Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5. “Qualified patient” shall be defined as any individual who obtains and uses marijuana for medical purposes upon the recommendation of a physician. (Ord. 3204 § 2, 2011). 5.66.020 Operation of medical marijuana dispensaries prohibited. A. The operation of a medical marijuana dispensary, as defined in this chapter, is prohibited in the City of Chula Vista, and no person or association of persons, however formed, shall operate or locate a medical marijuana dispensary in the City. The City shall not issue, approve, or grant any permit, license or other entitlement for the establishment or operation of a medical marijuana dispensary in the City of Chula Vista. B. This chapter does not apply where preempted by state or federal law. (Ord. 3204 § 2, 2011). 5.66.030 Violation – Penalty. Any person found to be in violation of any provision of this chapter shall not be subject to the criminal enforcement remedies set forth in Chapter 1.20 CVMC, Chapter 1.24 CVMC or any other criminal law violation and enforcement provision set forth in this code, as a result of such violation. (Ord. 3204 § 2, 2011). 5.66.040 Public nuisance. Any use or condition caused or permitted to exist in violation of any of the provisions of this chapter shall be, and is hereby declared, a public nuisance, which may be abated by the city pursuant to the procedures set forth in this code, and be subject to any associated civil remedies. (Ord. 3204 § 2, 2011). 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 199 Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 5.66 MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES Page 1/2 The Chula Vista Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 3369, passed June 14, 2016. Chapter 5.66 MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES Sections: 5.66.010 Definitions. 5.66.020 Operation of medical marijuana dispensaries prohibited. 5.66.030 Violation – Penalty.Repealed. 5.66.040 Public nuisance; Penalties.. 5.66.010 Definitions. “Medical marijuana dispensary” is any fixed facility or location where, under the purported authority of California Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5 et seq. or otherwise, marijuana is cultivated, made available, sold, transmitted, distributed, given or otherwise provided to, by, or among three or more persons for medical purposes. “Medical marijuana dispensary” shall not include the following uses, so long as such uses comply with this code, Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5 et seq., and other applicable law: 1. A clinic licensed pursuant to Chapter 1 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code. 2. A health care facility licensed pursuant to Chapter 2 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code. 3. A residential care facility for persons with chronic life-threatening illness licensed pursuant to Chapter 3.01 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code. 4. A residential care facility for the elderly licensed pursuant to Chapter 3.2 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code. 5. A hospice or a home health agency licensed pursuant to Chapter 8 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code. “Persons” shall include any individual or entity regardless of status as a qualified patient or primary caregiver. “Primary caregiver” shall be defined in the same manner as such term is defined in California Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5. “Qualified patient” shall be defined as any individual who obtains and uses marijuana for medical purposes upon the recommendation of a physician. (Ord. 3204 § 2, 2011). 5.66.020 Operation of medical marijuana dispensaries prohibited. A. The operation of a medical marijuana dispensary, as defined in this chapter, is prohibited in the City of Chula Vista, and no person or association of persons, however formed, shall operate or locate a medical marijuana dispensary in the City. The City shall not issue, approve, or grant any permit, license or other entitlement for the establishment or operation of a medical marijuana dispensary in the City of Chula Vista. B. This chapter does not apply where preempted by state or federal law. (Ord. 3204 § 2, 2011). 5.66.030 Violation – Penalty.Repealed. Any person found to be in violation of any provision of this chapter shall not be subject to the criminal enforcement remedies set forth in Chapter 1.20 CVMC, Chapter 1.24 CVMC or any other criminal law violation and enforcement provision set forth in this code, as a result of such violation. (Ord. 3204 § 2, 2011). 5.66.040 Public nuisance; Penalties.. Any use or condition caused or permitted to exist in violation of any of the provisions of this chapter shall be, and is hereby declared, a public nuisance, which may be abated by the city pursuant to the procedures set forth in this code, 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 200 Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 5.66 MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES Page 2/2 The Chula Vista Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 3369, passed June 14, 2016. and be subject to any associated civil or criminal remedies, except to the extent expressly and validly preempted by state or federal law. (Ord. 3204 § 2, 2011). 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 201 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTAAMENDING CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 1.41.110TO REMOVE THE EXISTING CIVIL PENALTIES CAPAND DELETINGCHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 5.66.030TOPERMITCRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT FOR VIOLATION OF CHAPTER5.66 WHEREAS, unlawful marijuana dispensaries have continued to operate in violation of Chula Vista Municipal Code section 5.66.020 despite administrative enforcement, the assessment of civil penalties of up to $100,000, and the commencement of civil litigation; and WHEREAS, Chula Vista Municipal Code section 1.41.110(C) currently caps the amount of civil penalties that can be assessed against an individual property for any related series of municipal code violations; and WHEREAS, Chula Vista Municipal Code section 5.66.030 currently prohibits the use of criminal enforcement remedies against persons found to be in violation of chapter 5.66; and WHEREAS, in City and County of San Francisco v. Sainez, the California Court of Appeal found that fines exceeding $100,000 did not violate excessive fines clauses of the Federal and State Constitutions; and WHEREAS, for purposes of constitutional inquiry under the excessive fines clause, the amount of fines imposed are required to bear some proportional relationship to the penalty’s deterrent purpose and the nature of the misconduct; and WHEREAS, in Kirby v. County of Fresno, the California Court of Appealheld that state law does not precludecriminal prosecution for failure to abate a public nuisanceregarding commercial marijuana activity; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the City to amend theChula Vista Municipal Code to permitcriminal enforcement for failure toabate a violation of Chapter 5.66; WHEREAS, itis in the best interests of the City to amend the Chula Vista Municipal Code to remove the existing civil penalty cap and permit penalties in excess of $100,000 when warranted; and NOW THEREFORE the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain as follows: SECTIONI A.Chapter 1, Section 1.41.110(C)ofthe Chula Vista Municipal Code regarding the assessment of civil penalties is amended to read as follows: 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 202 Ordinance Page 2 1.41.110 Civil Penalties C. Except for violations of land grading ordinances containedin Chapter 15.04 CVMC, civil penalties may be assessed at a daily rate not to exceed $1,000 per violation per day per tax assessor’s parcel number in the case of unimproved real property or per each structure against which violations have existed on a single tax assessor’s parcel number for any related series of violations. [Note: [1.41.110Subsections A, B, and D through Gremain unchanged]] B. Chapter 5, sections5.66.030 and 5.66.040 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code are hereby amended and restated as follows: 5.66.030Repealed. 5.66.040Public nuisance; Penalties. Any use or condition caused or permitted to exist in violation of any of the provisions of this chapter shall be, and is hereby declared, a public nuisance, which may be abated by the city pursuant to the procedures set forth in this code, and be subject to any associated civil or criminal remedies, except to the extent expressly and validly preempted by state or federal law. (Ord. 3204 § 2, 2011). SECTIONII Severability If any portion of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstance, is for any reason held to be invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional, by a court of competent jurisdiction, that portion shall be deemed severable, and such invalidity, unenforceability or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining portions of the Ordinance, or its application to any other person or circumstance. The City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby declares that it would have adopted each section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, sentences, clauses or phrases of the Ordinance be declared invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional. SECTION III Construction The City Council of the City of Chula Vista intends this Ordinance to supplement, not to duplicate or contradict, applicable state and federal law and this Ordinance shall be construed in light of that intent. SECTION IVEffective Date This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force on the thirtieth day after its final passage. SECTION VPublication 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 203 Ordinance Page 3 The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published or posted according to law. Presented by Approved as to form by _________________________________________________________________________ Glen R. Googins Glen R. Googins City Attorney City Attorney 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 204 City of Chula Vista Staff Report File#:16-0381, Item#: 6. RESOLUTIONOFTHECITYCOUNCILOFTHECITYOFCHULAVISTAAPPROVINGATWO PARTYAGREEMENTBETWEENTHECITYOFCHULAVISTAANDMOOREIACOFANOAND GOLTSMAN(MIG),INC.,FORDESIGNSERVICESFORTHEFSTREETPROMENADE STREETSCAPEMASTERPLANAND30%DESIGNDEVELOPMENTCONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS RECOMMENDED ACTION Council adopt the resolution. SUMMARY TheFStreetPromenadeStreetscapeMasterPlan(“Project”)isanapproximately1.25milelong segmentofFStreetfromThirdAvenuetoBayBoulevard(Attachment1,ProjectLocation).The projectwillcreateaMasterPlanand30%DesignDevelopmentConstructionDocumentsfora "Promenade"thatwilllinktheCity'sdowntownVillageDistrictandCivicCenterwiththeCity'sfuture Bayfront.Thislinkagewillprovideanopportunitytocreatesynergybetweenthesetwodistinctareas oftheCityandcreatebetteraccesstoall.Theneedforastreetscapeplanalongthisroadway segmentintheUrbanCoreisidentifiedinboththeCity’sGeneralPlanandfurtherdescribedasan implementationprojectintheUrbanCoreSpecificPlan.FundingfortheProjectismadepossible througha TransNet ActiveTransportationGrant(ATGP)theCityreceivedfromTheSanDiego Association of Governments (SANDAG) in 2015. ThisitemrequestsCityCouncilapprovalofaTwo-PartyAgreementforLandscapeArchitecture design services for the Project. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Environmental Notice Theactivityisnota“Project”asdefinedunderSection15378oftheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQuality ActStateGuidelines;therefore,pursuanttoStateGuidelinesSection15060(c)(3)noenvironmental review is required. Environmental Determination Theactivityisnota“Project”asdefinedunderSection15378oftheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQuality ActStateGuidelines;therefore,pursuanttoStateGuidelinesSection15060(c)(3)noenvironmental review is required. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Not applicable DISCUSSION City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 205 File#:16-0381, Item#: 6. Background ThrougharecentCallforProjectsbyTheSanDiegoAssociationofGovernments(SANDAG)theCityofChula Vista(“City”)appliedforandwassuccessfulinitsbidtoreceiveActiveTransportationFundingforplanning projectsthatsupportlocaleffortstoincreasewalking,biking,andtransitusagethroughouttheregion.TheCity wasawardedfundingthroughthe TransNet ActiveTransportationGrantProgram(ATGP)forthepreparationof theFStreetPromenadeStreetscapeMasterPlan(“Project”).TheCityenteredintoanAgreementwith SANDAG (Attachment 2) and received a notice to proceed in August 2015. Project Objectives TheMasterPlan’sprimaryobjectivesaretodevelopastreetscapeusingtheprinciplesofcompletestreetsand toestablishathemeandidentityforFStreetbetweenThirdAvenueandthefutureBayfront.ThePlanwill identifyfocalpoints,pedestrianconnectionstovariouslanduses,andmulti-modalaccess(viawalking,biking, andtransit)tonearbycommunityamenitiesandfacilitiessuchasparks,schools,CityHall,CivicCenter Library, office buildings, restaurants and local and regional shopping centers. SomeofthestreetimprovementstobeanalyzedaspartofthedevelopmentoftheMasterPlanare undergroundingofutilities,additionofbikelanes,extendedcurbreturnsatintersections,enhanced paving,pedestrian-scalelighting,way-finding,sitefurnishingsandaunifiedplantingscheme. Placemakingopportunitiestoenhancethepedestrianexperiencearehighlydesirable.TheProject, through its design features, will also promote energy efficiency and water conservation. Consultant Services Selection Process OnMay18,2016,staffissuedaRequestforProposalNo.RFP19-15/16forthepreparationoftheF StreetPromenadeStreetscapeMasterPlan.Thedocumentwaspubliclynoticedinaccordancewith the City’s bidding procedures. Atotalofthreefirmsrespondedbytheduedate,3p.m.onJune15,2016.ASelectionCommittee comprisedofsevenCitystaffmembersrankedtheproposalsbasedonpre-determinedcriteriaand selectedtwofirmstointerview.TheinterviewstookplaceonJuly20,2016andtheSelection CommitteerankedthefirmsandselectedMIG,Inc.asfirstnegotiationpreferencebasedontheir presentation,project’sunderstandingandmethodology,pastprojects,personnelexperience,and their vision for the F Street corridor. Scope of Work ThescopeofworkincludesthepreparationofaStreetscapeMasterPlanand30%Design Developmentconstructiondocuments(Attachment3,Two-PartyAgreement,ExhibitA).The proposedDesignProjectSchedule(Attachment3,ExhibitA,Attachment2)anticipatesthe Consultant’sworktakingapproximately12monthswithanoptiontoextendthecompletiondateif needed. 1.Streetscape Master Plan City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 206 File#:16-0381, Item#: 6. AStreetscapeMasterPlan(“MasterPlan”)istobepreparedbytheConsultantinaccordancewith theobjectivescontainedwithintheUrbanCoreSpecificPlan,aswellas,theCity’sStreetDesign andConstructionStandards.TheMasterPlanistoincludeacomprehensivesiteplanforthe development of the F Street Promenade from Third Avenue to Bay Boulevard. TheConsultantshallcoordinateandworkcloselywithCitystaffduringcommunityworkshops, development of the Project, and the approval process. Subsequently,theMasterPlanistoberefinedtodevelopaFinalStreetscapeMasterPlantobe presented to the Safety Commission and the City Council for review and approval. 2. Design Development (30% Construction) Documents FollowingapprovaloftheFinalStreetscapeMasterPlan,theConsultantwillproceedwiththe preparationofDesignDevelopmentdocuments.Thesedocumentsareequivalenttoa30% completeconstructiondocuments,includingbutnotlimitedtopreliminaryimprovementplans (grading,curb,gutter,sidewalks,andotherhardscapelayout),preliminaryplantingandirrigation plans,stripingplans,drainage/stormwaterqualityreportandapreliminaryestimateofprobable cost.ThesedocumentswillbepreparedinaccordancewiththerequirementsoftheCity’sstreet designandconstructionstandardsandanyotherapplicableCitycodes,standardsand specifications. Contract Payment ThetotalcostofthecontractforconsultingservicesfortheProjectis$224,680(Attachment3,Exhibit D). DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT StaffhasreviewedthepropertyholdingsoftheCityCouncilmembersandhasfoundnoproperty holdingswithin500feetoftheboundariesofthepropertywhichisthesubjectofthisaction. Consequently,thisitemdoesnotpresentadisqualifyingrealproperty-relatedfinancialconflictof interestunderCaliforniaCodeofRegulationsTitle2,section18702.2(a)(11),forpurposesofthe Political Reform Act (Cal. Gov’t Code §87100,et seq.). Staffisnotindependentlyaware,andhasnotbeeninformedby anyCityCouncilmember,ofany City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 207 File#:16-0381, Item#: 6. other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision maker conflict of interest in this matter. LINK TO STRATEGIC GOALS TheCity’sStrategicPlanhasfivemajorgoals:OperationalExcellence,EconomicVitality,Healthy Community, Strong and Secure Neighborhoods and a Connected Community. TheTwo-PartyAgreementdefinestherelationshipbetweentheCityandMIG,Inc.andformsa collaborativeteamtocreateamulti-modalcorridorthatwilltransformFStreetintoaninviting,thriving andsafelinkbetweentheThirdAvenueVillageandtheBayfrontwithstrongconnectionstothe surrounding community while providing active and passive recreation opportunities for all users. CURRENT YEAR FISCAL IMPACT TherewillbenoimpacttotheGeneralFundforconsultingservices.TheConsultantwillbepaidvia thefundingthroughthe TransNet ActiveTransportationGranttheCityreceivedfromSANDAGaswill City staff time for all associated costs. PerCouncilResolutionNo.2015-276,Fiscalyear2015/2016CIPbudgetwasamendedtoestablish aCIPproject,“FStreetPromenadeStudy”andappropriated$491,000inactiveTransportation Program grant funds and $27,345 in matching funds from the available balance of the Transnet Fund. ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT Approval of the Two-Party Agreement will not result in on-going fiscal impacts. ATTACHMENTS 1.Project Location Map 2.SANDAG Grant Agreement 3.Two-Party Agreement Staff Contact:Patricia Ferman, Project Manager, Development Services Department (Mark Caro, interim contact until 9/6/16, while Patricia is on vacation) City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 208 PROJECT L O C A T I O N E ST G ST T H I R D A V F I F T H A V F O U R T H A V B R O A D W A Y B AY BL D ST LAGOON DR W O O D L A W N A V F ST I ST I - 5 - F R E E W A Y NORTH F STREET PROMENADE MASTER PLAN LOCATION MAP 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 209 TransMet ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION GRANT PROGRAM GRANT AGREEMENT 5004534 BETWEEN THE SAN DIEGO ASSOCIAT¡ON OF GOVERNMENTS AND THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA REGARÐING ITS F STREET PROMENADE STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN THIS GRANT AGREËMENT 5004634 (Agreement) is made tf¡is . iI day of A ul r4s+ _. 201s,by and between the San Diego Association of Governments, 401 B Street Suite 800, San Diego, California, hereinafter referred to as SANÞAG, and the City of Chula Vista, 276 4th Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910, hereinafter referred to as Grantee. This agreement expires on Avlgt4C L l'l t 2Q l8 The following recitals are a substantive part of this Agreement: A. On September 26,2013, Governor Brown signed legislation creating the Astive Transportation Program (ATP) (Senate Bill 99 and Assembly Bill 101) to encourage increased use of aqtive modes of transportation such as bicycling and walking' B. ATP funding is awarded through a competitive process that consists of two stages: a statewide competition facilitated by the California Transportðtion Commissíon (CTC), followed by a regional competition facilitated by SANDAG. C. The regional competition for Cycle 1 ATP funds was conducted in 2014 and resulted in a list of '10 projerts to be funded through the ATP in the amount of $13.4i million. On September 26,2014, the Board of Directors recommended the final list of ranked projects to the CTC for funding allocation. Of the 10 recommended projects, 7 were from local jurisdictions with a cumulative award amount of $5.99 million, while the three remaining proiects were 5ANDAG Projects' D, the SANDAG Board of Directors allocates funds under the lransNet local sales tax program to support local bicycle and pedestrian transportation projects in the San Diego region through a competitive process. E. The lransNet Extension Ordinance contains provisions to fund the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Neighborhood Safety Program (BPNSP), which encompasses bicycle and pedestrian travel projects. The TranslVet BPNSP is commonly referred to ês the SANDAG Active Transportation Grant Program (ATGP)- F. Section 7 of the lranslVet Extension Ordinance allows for the exchange of federal, state, or other localfunds for lransNetfunds to maximize effectiveness in the use of revenues. G. On November 21,2Q14, the SANDAG Board of Directors approved the exchange of ATP funding for lransNetfunding forthe 7 localjurisdiction projects selected in the regionalATP competition by Resolution Number RTC 2015-02' H. Grantee successfully applied for ATP funding for its F Street Promenade Streetscape Master Plan (Project), as described in Grantee's grant application. The Scope of Work, Project Schedule, and Approved Project Budget are included as Attachment A' 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 210 J K. Grantee's Project is funded with $49'1,000 in ATGP funds. The IransNet Metropolitan Planning organization identification for the Project is CHW6. The purpose of this Ag¡eement is to establish the terms and conditions for SANDAG to provide Grantee with funding to implement the Project. L. Although SANDAG will be providing financial assistance to Grantee to support the Project, SANDAG wíll not take an aqtive role or retain substantial control of the Project. Therefore, this Agreement is characterized as a funding agreement rather than a cooperative agreement. Grantee underfands that ÏransNetfunds derìve from retail transactions and use tax revenues which fluctuate, SANDAG's funding commitment to ATGP projects, including this Project, is subject to these fluctuations, which may impact funding avaílability for thís Project. M. Grantee further understands that this Grant Award, ,Agreement and the Grantee's performance thereunder are subject to Board Policy No. 035, which includes multiple "use it or lose it" provisìons. NOW THEREFORE, it is agreed as follows: I, DEFINITIONS B. Application, The signed and dated grant application, lncluding any amendment thereto, with all explanatory, supporting, and supplementary documents filed with SANDAG by or on behalf of the Grantee and accepted or approved by SANDAG. All of Grantee's application materials, not in confl¡ct with this Agreement, are hereby incorporated into this Agreement as though fully set forth herein. Approval, Authorization, Concurrence, Waiver. A wrlttën stâtement (transmitted in typewritten hard copy or electronically) of a SANDAG official authorized to permit the Grantee to take or omit an action required by this Agreement, which action may not be taken or omitted without such written permission, Except to the extent that 5ANDAG determines otherwise in writing, such approval, authorization, concLrrrence, or waiver permitting the performance or omission of a specific aqtion does not constitute permission to perform or omit other similar actions. An oral permission or interpretation has no legal force or effect. Approved Project Budget. The most recent statement of the costs of the Project, the maximum amount of assistance from SANDAG for which the Grantee ís currently eligible, the specific tasks (including specific contingencies) covered, and the estímated cost of each task, that has been approved by SANDAG. The Approved Project Budget is included in Attachment A. ATGP Funds and Funding. Funding from the lransNet BPNSP. Grantee. The local jurisdiction that is the recipient of ATGP funding under this Agreement. c. Notice to Proceed means a wrítten notice from SANDAG issued to the Grantee authorizing the Grantee to proceed with all or a portion of the work described in the Scope of Work. Grantee shall not proceed with the work and shall not be eligible to receive payment for work performed prior to SANDAG's issuance of a Notice to Proceed, A. D. E. F, 2 \ 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 211 G. il. Subgrantee. Any contractor or consultant, at any tier, paid directly or indirectly with funds flowing from this Agreement for the Project. PROJECf IMPLEMENTATION A. General. The Grantee agrees to carry out the Project as follows: L Project Description. Grantee agrees to perform the work as described in the Scope of Work included as Attachment A. 2, Effective Date, The effective date of this Agreement or any amendment hereto is the date on which this Agreement or an amendment is fully executed. The Grantee agrees to undertake Project work promptly after receiving a Notice to Proceed from SANDAG, 3. Grantee's Capacity. The Grantee agrees to maintain or acquire sufficient legal, financial, technical, and managerial capacity to: (a) plan, manaqe, and complete the Project and províde for the use of any Project property; (b) carry out the safety and security aspects of the Project; and (c) comply with the terms of the Agreement and all applicable laws, regulatíons, and policles pertaining to the Project and the Grantee, including but not limited to the lransNet Extension Ordinance and Board Policy No.035. 4, Project Schedule. The Grantee agrees to complete the Project according to the Project Schedule included in Attachment A ðnd in compliance with Board Policy No. 035, as amended, and included as Attachment B. 5, Project tmplementation and Oversight. Grantee agrees to comply with the Project lmplementation and Oversight Requirements. included as Attachment C, and Board Policy No.035, as amended' 6. Changes to Project's Scope of Work. This Agreement was awarded to Grantee based on the application submitted by Grantee, which contained representations by Grantee regarding project parameters, project proximity to transit, and other criteria relevant to evaluating and ranking the Project based on the Regional ATP scoring criteria, Any substantive deviation from Grantee's representations in the Application during project implementation may require reevaluation or result in loss of funding, lf Grantee knows or should have known that substantive changes to the Project will occur or have occurred, Grantee will immediately notify SANDAG in writing. SANDAG will then determine whether the Project is still consistent with the overall objectives of the ATGP and Regional ATP and whether lhe changes would have negatively affected the Project ranking during the competitive grant evaluation process. SANDAG reserves the right to have ,ATGP Funding withheld from Grantee, or refunded to SANDAG, due to Grantee's failure to satisfactorily complete the Project or due to substantive changes to the Project. 7. Media and Comrnunit¡r Outreach Coordination. The Grantee agrees notify SANDAG of any media and community outreach efforts, including presentations to community groups, other agencies, and elected officials. The Grantee agrees to assist SANDAG with media or community events related to the Project, such as ground breaking and ribbon cutting. Press materials shall be provided to SANDAG staff before 3 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 212 they are d¡str¡buted. SANDAG logo(s) should be included in press materlals and other project collateral, but may never be included in such documents without advance apProval from SANDAG. As part of the quarterly reports submitted to SANDAG, the Grantee agrees to provide project milestone information to support media and communications efforts. SANDAG reserves the right to use the information provided by the Grantee for any combination of the following, including but nol limited to; social media posts, online photo albums, videos, press releases, PowerPoint presentations, web updates, newsletters, and testimonials. ln submitting photos to SAND,AG, the Grantee agrees to release the rights of the photos to SANDAG for its use. 8. Project Signage and Designation of Iränsruet Funded Facilities, Each capital project in excess of $250,000 funded in whole or in part by revenues from the lransNet Extension Ordinance shall be clearly designated during ¡ts construction or implementation as beíng provided by revenues from the lransNet EKension Ordinance. Grantee agrees to follow the Project Signage Specifications. SANDAG will provide sign specifications. Grantee agrees to follow sign specifícations and submit proof files to SANL)AG for approval before prlntlng. 9. Baseline Data Collection. For capital projecls, Grantee is required to coordinate with SANDAG staff on the development of a baseline data collection plan in accordance with the Project lmplementation and Oversight Requirements. B. Application of Laws. Should a federal or stäte law pre-etnpt ä locäl law, regulation, orthe IransNet Extension Ordinance, the Grantee must comply with the federal or stäte law and implementing regulations. No provision of this Agreement requires the 6rantee to observe or enforce compliance with any provision, perïorm any other act, or do any other task in contravention of federal, state, territorial, or local law, regulation, or ordinance. lf compliance with any provision of this Agreement violates or would require the Grãntee to violate any law, the Grantee agrees to notify SANDAG immediately in writing. Should this occur, 5ANDAG and the Grantee agree that they will make appropriate arrangements to proceed with or, if necessary, terminate the Project or affected portions thereof expeditiously. C. Notice Regarding Prevailing Wages. SANDAG's ATGP Grânts are funded with IransNet revenues consistent with the lransNet Extension Ordinance adopted by the voters in November 2004 (SANDAG Ordinance 04-01). Although SANDAG Ordinance 04-01 does not require payment of prevailing wages, Calìfornia law may require that Grantee's public works projects pay prevailing wages for workers, Grantee acknowledges that SANDAG has strongly encouraged Grantee to seek legal counsel regarding whether the Project will be subject to prevailing wage laws consistent with Labor Code 5ection 1720, etseq. This Agreement requires Grantee's compliance with all federal, state, and local laws and ordinances as applicable. D, Significant Participation by a Subgrantee. Although the Grantee may delegate any or almost all Project responsibilitiesto one or more subgrantees, the Grantee agreesthat it, 4 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 213 E. F. rather than any subgrantee, is ult¡mately responsible for compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and this Agreement' Th¡rd Party Contracting. Grantee shall not award contracts over three thousand dollars ($3,000) on the basis of a noncompetitive procurement for work to be performed under this Agreement without the prior written approval of SANDAG. Contracts awarded by Grantee, if intended as local match credit, must meet the requirements set forth in this Agreement regarding local match funds. 1. lf Grantee hires a consultant to carry out professional services funded under this Agreement, Grantee shall: prepare an lndependent Cost Estimate (lCE) prior to solÍciting proposals; publicly advertise for competing proposals for the work; use cost as an evaluatíon factor in selecting the consultant; document a Record of Negotiation (RON) establishing that the amount paid by Grantee for the consultant services ls fair and reasonable; and pass through the relevant obìigations in this Agreement to the consultant. Z, lf Grantee hires a contractor to carry out construction seruices funded under this Agreement, Grantee shall: prepare an ICE (e.9., a construction cost estimate) priorto soliciting bids; publicly advertise for competing bids for the work; award the work to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder; document a RON establishing that the amount paid by Grantee for the construction services is fair and reasonable; and pass through the relevant obligations in this Agreement to the contractor. Grantee's Responsibility to Extend Agreement Requ¡rements to Other Entities 1. Entities Affected. Grantee agrees to take appropriate measures necessary to ensure that all Project part¡cipants comply with all applicable federal laws. regulations, and policies affecting Project implementation. ln addition, if an entity otherthan the Grantee is expected to fulfill any responsibilities typically performed by the Grantee, the Grantee agrees to assure that the entity carries out the Grantee's responsibilitìes as set forth in this Agreement. Z. Documents Affected. The applicability provisions of laws, regulations, and policies determine the extent to which those provisions affect an entity (such as a subgrantee) participating in the Project through the Grantee. Thus, the Grantee agrees to use a written document to ensure that each entity partìcipating in the Project complies with applicable laws, regulations, and policies' 3. Flowdorarn. The Grantee agrees to include in each document (subagreement, lease, third-party contrast, or other) äny necessary provisions requiring the Projest participant (third-party contractor, subgrantee, or other) to impose applicable laws, Agreement requirements and dírectives on its subgrantees, lessees, third-party contractors. and other Project participants at the lowest tier necessary. No SANDAG Obligations to Third'Pa¡ties, ln connection with the Project, the Grantee agrees that sANDAG shall not be subject to any obligations or liabilities to any subgrantee, lessee, third-party contractor, or other person or entity that is not a party to the Agreement for the project. Notwithstanding that SANDAG may have concurred in or approved any solicitation. subagreement, lease, or third-party contract at any tier, SANDAG has no 5 G 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 214 t. H. obligations or liabilities to any entity other than the Grantee, including any subgrantee, lessee, or third-party contractor at any tier. Changes in Project Pe¡{ormance. The Grantee agrees to notify SANDAG immediatel¡ in writing, of any change in local law, conditions (including its legal, financial, or technical capacity), or any other event that may adversely affect the Grantee's ability to perform the Project in accordance with the terms of the Agreement and as required by Board Policy No. 035. The Grantee also agrees to notify SANDAG immediately, in writlng, of any current or prospective major dispute, breach, default, or litigation that may adversefy affect SANDAG's interests in the Project; and agrees to inform SANDAG, also in writing, before naming SANDAG as a party to litigation for any reêson, in any forum. At a minimum, the Grantee agrees to send each notice to SANDAG required by this subsection to SANDAG's Office of General Counsel. Standard of Care. The Grantee expressly warrants that the work to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall be perforrned in accordance with the applicable standard of care. Where approval by SANDAG, its Executive Director, or other representat¡ve of SANDAG is indicated in the Scope of Work. it is understood to be conceptual approval only and does not relieve the Grantee of responsibility for complying with all laws, codes, industry standards, and liability for damages caused by negligent acts, errors, omissions, noncompliance with industry standards, or the willful misconduct of the Grantee or its subgrantees. il¡. ETHICS A.Grantee Code of ConducUstandards of Conduct. The Grantee agrees to maintain a written code of conduct or standards of conduct that shall govern the actions of its officers, employees, council or board members, or agents engaged in the award or administration of subagreements, leases, or third-party contracts supported with ATGP funding. The Grantee agrees that its code of conduct or standards of conduct shall specify that its ôfflcefs, employees, council or board members, or agents may neither solicit nor accept gratuities, favors, or anything of monetary value from any present or potential subgrantee, lessee. or third-party contractor at any tier or agent thereof. The Grantee may set de mínimis rules where the financial interest is not substantial, or the gift is an unsolicited item of nominal intrinsic value. The Grantee agrees that its code of conduct or standards of conduct shall also prohibit its officers, employees, board members, or ãgents from using their respective positions in a mannerthat presents a real or apparent personal or organizational conflict of interest or personal gain. As permitted by state or local law or regulations, the Grantee agrees that its code of conduct or standards of conduct shall include penalties, sanctions, or other disciplinary actions for violatíons by íts officers, employees. council or board members, or their agents, or its third-party contractors or subgrantees or their agents. 1. Personal Confticts of lnterest, The Grantee ãgrees that its code of conduct or standards of conduqt shall prohibit the Grantee's employees, officers, council or board mernbers, or agents from participating in the seleqtion, ôwärd, or administration of any third-party contract or subagreement supported by ATGP fundìng if a real or apparent conflict of interest would be involved. Such a conflict would arise when an employee, officer, board member, or agent, including any member of his or her immediate family, partner, or organization that employs, or intends to employ, any of the parties listed herein has a financial interest in a firm competing for award. 6 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 215 2. Organizational Conflicts of lnterest. The Grantee agrees that its code of conduct or standards of conduct shall include procedures for identifying and preventing real and apparent organizational conflicts of interest. An organizational conflict of interest exists when the nature of the work to be performed under a proposed third-party contract or subagreement may, without some restrictions on future activities, result in an unfair competitive advantage lo the third-party contractor or subgrantee or impair its objectivity in performing the contract work. B. SANDAG Code of Conduct. SANDAG has established policies concerning potential conflicts of interest. These policies apply to Grantee. For all awards by SANDAG, any practices which might result in unlawful act¡vity are prohibited including, but not limited to, rebates, kickbacks, or other unlawful considerations. SANDAG staff members are specifically prohibited from participating in the seleqtion process when those staff have a close personal relationship, family relationship, or past (within the last l2 months), present, or potentiðl business or employment relationship with a person or business entity seeking ä contract with SANDAG. lt is unlawful for any contract to be made by SANDAG if any indivídual Board member or staff has a prohibited financial interest in the contract. Staff are also prohibited from soliciting or accepting gratuities from any organization seeking funding from SANDAG. SANDAG's officers, employees, ägents, and Board members shall not solicit or accept gifts, gratuities, favors, or anything of monetary value from consultants, potential consultants, or parties to subagreements. By signing this Agreement, Grantee affirms that il has no knowledge of an ethical violation by SANDAG staff or 6rantee, lf Grantee has any reason to believe a conflict of interest exists with regard to the Agreement or the Project, it should not¡fy the SANDAG Office of General Counsel Ímmediately. C. Bonus or Commission. The Grantee affirms that it has not paid, and agrees not to pay. any bonus or commission to obtain approval of its ATGP Funding application for the Project. D. False or Fraudulent Statements or Claims. The Grantee acknowledges and agrees that by executing the Agreement for the Project, the Grantee certifies or affirms the truthfulness and accuracy of each statement it has made, it makes. or it may make in connection w¡th the project, including, but not limited to, the Grantee's grant application, progress reports and invoices. IV. AMOUNT OF FUNDING ASSISTANCE The Grantee agrees that 5ANDAG will provide ATGP Funding for the Project equal to the smaller of the following amounts: (a) the Maximum SANDAG Amount Approved of $491,000, or (b) the amount calculated in accordanqe with the Maximum Percentage(s) of SANDAG Participation, which is 94.72 percent (94.72V").5ANDAG's responsibility to make payments under this Agreement is limited to the amounts listed in the Approved Project Budget for the Projecl. Grantee's estimate in its application for funding from SANDAG for the Project is the amount that forms the basis upon which SANDAG determines the Maximum SANDAG Amount Awarded and Maximum Percentage(s) of SANDAG ParticiPation. V, MATCHING FUNDS Grantee has proposed to provide 527,345 in matching funds for the Project and therefore agrees as 7 follows: 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 216 A. Duty to Obtain Matching Funds. The Grantee agrees to provide sufficient funds or approved in-kind resources, together with the ATGP Funding awarded, that will assure payment of the actual cost of each ProJect activity covered by this Agreement. The amount of match¡ng funds and percentage(s) of matching funds Grantee shall provide are set fofth in the Approved project Budget. The Grantee agrees to complete all proceedings necessary to provide its share of the Project costs at or before the time the matching funds are needed for Project costs. B. prompt payment of Matching Funds. The Grantee agrees to provide the proportionate amount of the matching funds promptly as it incurs Project costs or Project costs become due' Each of Grantee's invoices must include its pro'rata matching fund contribution as reflected in the Approved Project Budget, along with supporting, descriptive and/or explanatory documentation for the matching funds provided. C. Reduction of Matching Funds. The Grantee agrees that no refund or reduction of the amount of matching funds may be made unless, at the same time, a reduction of the proportional amount of the ATGP funding provided is made to SANDAG in order to maintain the Maximum Percentage(s) of SANDAG Participation. VI. APPROVEDPROJECTBUDGET Except to the extent that SANDAG determines otherwise in writing, the Grantee agrees as follows: The Grantee and SANDAG have agreed to a Project budgetthat is designated the "Approved project Budget." The Grantee will incur obligations and make disbursements of Project funds only as authorized by the Approved Projcct Budget. An amendment to the Approved Project Buclget requires the issuance of a formal amendment to the ,Agreement, unless the re-allocation of funds among budget items or fiscal years that not ¡ncrease the total amount of the ATGP fundìng awardecl for the Project, does not negatively impad the benefits obtained from the Project, and is consistent with applicable laws, regulatlons, and polictes. Prtr:r wri[ten SANDAG Project Manager approval is required for transfers of funds between Approved Project Budget line ítems' VII. PAYMENTS A. Grantee,s Request for Payment llllhen Matching Funds Are Required. The Grantee will demonstrate or certify that it will provide adequate matching funds such that, when combined with payments from SANDAG, will cover all costs to be incurred for the Project. Except to the extent that SANDAG determines, in writing, that the Grantee may defer its provision of matching funds for the Project, a Grantee is required under the terms of this Agreement to provide matching funds for the Project and agrees that it will not; 1. Request or obtain matching funds exceeding the amount justified by the matching share previouslY Provided, or 2. Take any action that would cause the proportion of ATGP funding made available to the project at any t¡me to exceed the percentage authorized by the Agreement for the Project. B. payment by SANDAG. Upon receiving a request for payment and adequate supporting information, SANDAG will make payment for eligible amounts to Grantee within th¡rlry (30) days if Grantee has complied with the reguirements of the Agreement, including submission 8 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 217 c. of a Quarterly Report which is included as Attachment D, has satisfied SANDAG that the ATGP funding requested is needed for Project purposes in that requisition period, and is making adequate progress toward Project completion consistent with Board Policy No. 035. After the Grantee has demonstrated satisfactory compliance with the preceding requirements, 5ANDAG may reimburse the Grantee's apparent allowable costs incurred consistent with the Approved project Budget. SANDAG shall retain ten percent (10%) from the amounts invoiced until satisfactory completion of work. SANDAG shall promptly release retention amounts to Grantee following Grantee's satisfactory completion of work and receipt of Grantee's final invoice and all required documentation. Ëligible Costs. The Grantee agrees that Project costs eligible for ATGP funding must comply with the following requirements, unless SANDAG determines othenivise in writing. To be eligible for reimbursement, Project costs must be: 1. Consistent with the Project Scope of Work, the Approved Project Budget, and other provisions of the Agreement. 2. Necessary in order to accomplish the Project. 3. Reasonable for the goods or services purchased. 4. Actual net costs to the Grantee (i.e., the price paid minus any refunds, rebates, or other items of value received by the Grantee that have the effect of reducing the cost actual ly incu rred, excludin g pro g ra m i ncome)' 5. lncurred for work performed, only on a reimbursement basis, after both the Effective Date of the Agreement and following Grantee's receipt of a Notice to Proceed from SANDAG. 6. Satisfactorily documented with supporting documentation which is to be submitted with each invoice. 1. Treated consistently in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and procedures for the Grantee and any third-party contractors and subgrantees, (see Section I Accounting Records)' B. Eligible for TransNetfunding as part of the ATGP. g. lndirect Costs are only allowable with prior SANDAG approval. Grantee must submit the following documentation as part of the grant application materials: ('l) an indirect cost allocation audit approved by a qualified independent auditor or (2) the applicant's proposed method for allocating indirect costs in accordance with OMB Circular A-87 guidelines. lndirect cost allocation plans must be reviewed and renewed annually. 10. Project generated revenue realized bythe Grantee shall be utilized in support of the project. Project generated revenue and expenditures, if any, shall be reported at the end of the Agreement Period. 9 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 218 D. Excluded Costs 1 ln determining the amount of ATGP funding SANDAG will provÍde for the Project, SANDAG will exclude: a,Any Project cost incurred by the Grantee before either the date SANDAG lssues a Notice to Proceed to Grantee or the Effective Date of the Agreement or any Amendment thereto; b. Any cost that is not included in the latest Approved Project Budget; c.Any cost for Project property or services received in connection with a subagreement, lease, third-party conträct, or other arrangement that is required to be, but has not been, concurred in or approved in writing by SANDAG; and d Any cost ineligible for SANDAG participation as provided by applicable laws, regulations, or policies. 2.Certain costs at times associated with bicycle and pedestrian projects are not eligible when the benefit provided ¡s notthe exclusive use of bicyclists or pedestrians. These instances are listed below. Curb and gutter are part of the roadway drainage system, As such, newly installed curb and gutter cannot be considered an improvement exclusively for the benefit of the sidewalk or bike lane and are not an eligible expense. Driveway ramps ínstalled across sidewalks are not for the benefit of pedestrians, and in fact, degrade the pedestrian environment. Claimanls may not include the cost of driveway ramps in applications for sidewalk projects. However, the distance across Üre clriveway rrray be lnrluded wlrerr corrr¡ruLlng [lrc F]er-squ¿¡re- foot cost of the sidewalk. Where roadway design standards require a roadway shoulder width at least as wide as would be required for a standard bike lane, the cost of the shoulder construction will not be eligible. Appropriate bikeway signage is eligible. Under some circumstances, it may be necessary to remove and replace curb and gutter, driveway ramps, drainage facilities and other existing improvements in order to construct a bikeway or sidewalk. ln such cases the cost of this work is most likely eligible, but claimants should carefully document why this is so in the claim submittal. The Grantee understands and agrees that payment to the Grantee for any Project cost does not constitute SANDAG's final decision about whether that cost is allowable and eligible for payment under the Project and does not constitute a waiver of any violation by the Grantee of the terms of the Agreement for the Project or Board Policy No. 035. The Grantee acknowledges that SANDAG will not make a final determination about the allowability and elígibility of any cost until the final payment has been made on the Project orthe results of an audit of the Project requested by SANDAG or its lndependent Taxpayers' Oversight Committee (ITOC) has been completed, whichever occurs latest, lf SANDAG determines that h c. d. E. 10 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 219 the Grantee is not entitled to receive any portion of the ATGP funding requested or paid, SANDAG wíll notify the Grantee in writing, stating its reasons. The Grantee agrees that Project closeout will not alter the Grantee's responsibility to return any funds due to SANDAG as a result of later refunds, corrections, performance deficiencies, or other similar actions; nor will Project closeout alter SANDAG's right to disallow costs and recover funds provided for the Project on the basis of a later audit or other review. Upon notification to the Grantee that specific amounts are owed to SANDAG, Vvhether for excess payments of ATGP funding, disallowed costs, orfunds recovered from third parties or elsewhere, the Grantee agrees to promptly remit to SANDAG the amounts owed, including applicable interest, penalties and admi n istrative charges. VIIl. ACCOUNTING RECORDS ln compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and policies, the Grantee agrees as follows: A. project Accounts. The Grantee agrees to establish and maintain for the Project either a separate set of accounts or separate accounts within the framework of an established accounting system that can be identified with the Proiect. The Grantee also agrees to maintain documentation of all checks, payrolls, invoices, contracts, vouchers, orders, or other accounting documents related in whole or in part to the Project so that they may be clearly identified, readily accessible, and available to SANDAG upon request and, to the extent feasible, kept separate from documents not related to the Project' B. Documentation of Proiect Costs and Program Income. Except to the extent that SANDAG determines otherwise, in writing, the Grantee agrees to support all costs charged to the Project, including any approved se¡vices or property contributed by the Grantee or others, with properly executed payrolls, time records, invoices, contrads, orvouchers describing in detail the nature and propriety of the charges, including adequate records to support the coçts the Grantee has incurred underlying any payment in which SANDAG has agreed to participate in based upon a payable milestone' IX. REPORTIN6, RECORD RETENTION, AND ACCESS A. Types of Reports, The Grantee agrees to submit to SANDAG all reports required by law and regulation, policy. this Agreement, and any other reports SANDAG may specify. B. Report Formats. The Grantee agrees that all reports and other documents or information intended for public availability developed in the course of the Project and required to be submitted to SANDAG must be prepared and submitted ìn electronic and/or typewritten hard copy formats, as SANDAG may specify. SANDAG reserves the ríght to specify that records be submitted in particular formats. C. Record Retention, During the course of the Projeqt and for three years thereafter from the date of transmission of the final expenditure report, the Grantee agrees to maintain, intact and readily accessible, all data, documents, reports, records, contracts, and supporting materials relating to the Project, as SANDAG may require. D. Access to Records of Grantees and Subgrantees. The Grantee agrees to permit, and require its subgrantees to permit, SANDAG or its authorized representativet upon request, to 11 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 220 inspectall Projectwork, materials, payrolls, and other data, and to auditthe books, records, and accounts of the Grantee and its subgrantees perlaining to the Project. E. Project Closeout, The Grantee agrees that Project closeout does not alter the reporling and record retention requirements of this Agreement. F. Quarterly Reports. Grantee shall submit written quarterly reports to SANDAG detailing the progress of its work, expenditures incurred, and information regarding whether the Project is projected to be completed w¡thin the limits of the Approved Project Budget, Project Schedule. and consistent w¡th Board Policy No. 035 and any polícy amendments thereto. 6rantee shall document the progress and results of work performed under this Agreement to the satisfaction of SANDAG. This includes progress and final reports, plans. specifications, est¡mates, and other evidence of attainment of the Agreement objectives, which are requested by SANDAG or ITOC. Grantee may be required to attend meetings of SANDAG staff and committees, including but not limited to ITOC, the Regional Planning Committee, the Transportation Committee, and the SANDAG Board of Directors, to report on its progress and respond to questions. G. Communities Served Data and Report. lf requested, Grantee shall provide SANDAG with data regarding howthe Project's benefits and burdens were equitably distributed among socio and economic populations in the area affeqted by the Project, and associated smart growth data. X. Project Completion, Audit, Settlement, and Closeout A. Project Completion. Within ninety (90) calendar days following Project completion or termination by SANDAC, the Grantee agrees to submit a final certífication of Project expenses and final reports, as applicable. All payments made to the Grantee shall be subject to review for compliancc by SANDAG with the requirements of this Agreement and shall be subject to an audit upon completion of the Project. B. Project Audit. The Grantee agrees to have financiaì and compliance audits performed as SANDAG may require consistent with the IransNet Extension Ordinance. The Grantee agrees that Project closeoutwill not alter the Grantee's audit responsibilities. Audit cosls are allowable Project costs. C. Performance Audit. The Grantee agrees to cooperate with SANDAG or ITOC with regard to any performance audit that is performed on the Project pursuant to the IransNet Ordinance. D.Project Closeout. Projecl closeoul occurs when SANDAG notifies the Grantee that SANDAG has closed the Projest, and, if applicable, either forwards the final ATGP funding payment and or acknowledges that the Grantee has remitted the proper refund. The Grantee agrees that Project closeout by SANDAG does not invalidate any continuing requírements imposed by the Agreement or any unmet requirements set forth in a wrítten notification from SANDAG. Project Use. Grantee was awarded this Agreement based on representations in ¡ts grant application regarding the Project's intended use. lf the Project is a capital project, Grantee E. 12 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 221 xt. A. hereby commits to continued use of the Project for the purposes stated in its application for a period of at least five years after completion of construction. SANDAG may require Grantee to refund ATGP funding provided for the Project in the event Grantee fails to ut¡lize the Project for its intended purposes as stated in the grant application or for any dísallowed costs. TIMELY PROGRESS AND RIGHT OF SANDAG TO TERMINATE Grantee shall make diligent and timely progress toward completion of the Project within the timelines setforth in the Project Schedule, and consistent with Board Policy No.035 and any policy amendments thereto. lf timely progress is not achieved, SANDAG may, in its sole discretion, review the status of the Project to determine if the remaining funding should be reallocated to another eligible project, as per Board Policy No. 035. Grantee understands and agrees that any failure to make reasonable progress on the Project or violation of this Agreement and/or Board Policy No. 035, that endangers substantial performance of the Project shall provide sufficient grounds for SANDAG, in its sole discretion, to terminate this Agreement. ln the event Grantee encounters difficulty in meeting the eroject Schedule or anticipates difficulty in complying with the Project Schedule, the Grantee shall immediately notify the SANDAG Project Manager in writing, and shall provide pertinent details, including the reason(s) for the delay in performance and the date by which Grantee expects to complete performance or delivery. This notification shall be informatíonal in character only and receipt of it shall not be construed as a waiver by SANDAG of a project delivery schedule or date, or any rights or remedies provided by this Agreement, including Board Policy No' 035 requirements. Upon written notice, the Grantee agrees that SANDAG may suspend or terminate all or any part of the ATGP funding to be provided for the Project if the Grantee has violated the terms of the Agreement. or Board Policy No. 035, or if SANDAG determines that the purpose of the laws or policíes authorizing the Project would not be adequately served by the continuation of ATGP funding for the Project. ln general, termination of ATGP funding for the Project will not invalidate obligations properly incurred by the Grantee before the termination date to the extent those obligations cannot be canceìed. lf, however, SANDAG determines that the Grantee has willfully misused ATGP funding by failing to make adequate progress, or failing to comply w¡th the terms of the Agreement, SANDAG reserves the right to require the Grantee to refund to SANDAG the entire amount of ATGP funding provided for the Project or any lesser amount as SANDAG may determine. Expiration of any Projecttime perìod established in the Project Schedule will nol by itself, automatically constitute an expiration or termination of the Agreement for the Project, however, Grantee must request and SANDAG may agree to amend the Agreement in writing ¡f the Project Schedule will not be met. An amendment to the Project Schedule may be made at SANDAG's discretion if Grantee's request is consistent with the provisions of Board Policy No. 035. B, c. D. E. 13 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 222 xil. crvtL RTGHTS The Grantee agrees to comply with all applicable civil rights laws, regulations and policies and shall includethe provisions of this Section 12 in each subagreement, lease, third party contract or other legally binding document to perform work funded by this Agreement. Applicable civil rights laws, regulations and policies include, but are not limited to, the following: A. Nondiscrimination. SANDAG implements its programs without regard to income level, disability, race, color, and national origin in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Ast and Title Vl of the Civil Rights Act. Grantee shall prohibit discrimination on these grounds, notify the public of their rights under these laws, and utilize a process for addressing complaints of discrimination. Furthermore, Grantee shall make the procedures for filing a complaint available to members of the public and will keep a log of all such complaints. Grantee must notify SANDAG immediately if a complaint is lodged that relates to the Project or program funded by this grant. B. Equal Employment Opportunity. During the performance of thìs Agreement, Grantee and all of its subcontractors, if any, shall not unlawfully discriminate, harass, or allow harassment, against any employee or applicant for employment because of sex, race, color, ancestry, religious creed, national origin, disability (including HIV and AIDS), mental disability, medical condition (cancer). age (over 40), marital status, denial of family and rnedical care leave, denial of pregnancy disability leave, veteran status, or sexual orientation. Grantee and its subcontractors shall ensure that the evaluation and treatment of their employees and applicants for employment are free from such discrimination and harassment. Grantee and its subcontractors shall comply with the provisions of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (California Government Code Sestion'12900, etseg.) and the applicable regulations prçrr¡ulgated thereunder (California Code of Regulations, Titlc 2, Scction 7?85.0, ctseg.), The applicable regulations of the Fair Employment and Housing Commission implementing California Government Code Section 12990 (a-f). set forth in Chapter 5 of Division 4 of Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations. are incorporated into this Agreement by this reference and are made a part hereof as if set forth in full. Grantee and its subcontractors shall give written notice of their obligations under this clause to labor organizations with which they have a collective bargaining or other agreement' XIII. OWNERSHIP OF WORK PRODUCT SANDAG shaìl own any deliverables created in whole or in part for SANDAG's benefit pursuant to the Scope of Work for the Project. The term "deliverables" includes, but is not limited to, all original drawings, reports, photos, and other documents, including detailed calculations and other work product developed for the Project or services performed on the Project. XIV. DISPUTES AND VENUE A. Choice of Law. This Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Dispute Resolution Process. ln the event Grantee has a dispute with SANDAG during the performance of this Agreement, Grantee shall continue to perform unless SANDAG informs Grantee in writing to cease performance. The dispute resolution process for disputes arising under this Agreement shall be as follows: B, 14 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 223 c. 1. Grantee shall submit a statement of the grounds for the dispute, including all pertinent dates, names of persons involved, and supporting documentation, to 5ANDAG's Project Manager. The Project Manager and other appropriate SANDAG staff will review the documentation in a timely manner and reply to Grantee within twenty (20) calendar days. Upon receipt of an adverse decision by S,ANDAG, Grantee may submit a request for reconsideration to SANDAG's Executive Director. The request for reconsideration must be received'within ten (10) calendar days from the postmark date of SANDAG's reply, The Executive Director will respond to the request for reconsideration within ten (10) working days. The decision of the Executive Director will be in writing. Z, lf Grantee is dissatisfied with the results following exhaustion of the above dispute resolution procedures, Grantee shall make a written request to SANDAG for appeal to the SANDAG Transportation Committee. SANDAG shall respond to a request for mediation within thirty (30) calendar days. The decision of the Transportation Committee shall be final. Venue. lf any action is brought to interpret or enforce any term of this Agreement, the action shall be brought ¡n a state or federal court situated in the County of San Diego, State of California. ln lhe event of any such litigation between the parties, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all reasonable costs incurred, including reasonable attorney's fees, litigation and collection expenses, witness fees, and court costs as determined bythe court. XV. ASSIGNMËNT Grantee shall not assign, sublet, or transfer (whether by assignment or novation) this Agreement or any rÍghts under or interest in this Agreement. XVI. INSURANCE Grantee shall procure and maintain during the period of performance of this Agreement, and for twelve (12) months following completion, policies of insurance from insurance companies authorized to do business in the State of California or the equìvalenttypes and amounts of self- insurance, as follows: A. General Liability. Combined single limit of $ 1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 general aggregate for personal and bodily injury, including death, and broad form properly damage, The policy must include an acceptable "Waiver of Transfer Rights of Recovery Against Others Endorsement." The policy must name SANDAG as an additional insured in the endorsement. A deductible or retention may be utilized, subject to approval by SANDAG. B. Automobile Liability. For personal and bodily injury, including death, and property damage in an amount not less than $1,000,000' C, Workers, Compensation and Employer's Liability. Policy must comply with the laws of the State of California. The poliry must include an acceptable "Waiver of Rightto Recover From Others Endorsement" naming sANDAG as an additional insured. 15 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 224 Other Requirements. Grantee shall furnish satisfactory proof by one or more certificates (original copies) that it has the foregoing insurance. The insurance shall be provided by an acceptable insurance provider, as determined by SANDAG, which satisfies the following minimum requirements: 1. An insurance carrierqualified to do business in California and maintaining an agentfor service of process wíthin the state. Such insurance carr¡er shall maintain ð current A.M. Best rating classification of " A-" or better, and a financial size of "$10 million to $24 million (Class V) or better," or Z. A Lloyds of London program provided by syndicates of Lloyds of London and other London insurance carriers, providing all participants are qualified to do business in California and the policy provides for an agent for service of process in California. Certificates of insurance shall be filed with SANDAG. These policies shall be primary insurance as to SANDAG so that any other coverage held by SANDAG shall not contribute to any loss under Grantee's insurance. lnsurance policies shall not be canceled withoutfirst giving thirty (30) days advance written notice to SANDAG. For purposes of this notice requirement, any material change in the poìiqy prior to its expiration shall be considered a cancellation. XVII. ¡NDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS D- E. B. A.Generally. With regard to any claim, protest, or litigat¡on arising from or related to the Grantee's performance in connection with or incidental to the Project or this Agreement, Grantee agrees to defend, indemnify, protect, and hofd SANDAG and its agentl officers, Board members, and employees harmless from and against any and all claims, including. but not limited to prevailing wage claims aga¡nst the Project, asserted or established liability for damages or injuries to any person or properly, Including injury to the Grantee's or its subgrantees' employees, agents, or officers, which arìse from or are connected with or are caused or claimed lo be caused by the negligent, reckless, or willful acts or omissions of the Grantee and its subgrantees and their agents, officers, or employees, in performing the work or services herein, and all expenses of investigating and defending against same, including attorney fees and costs; provided, however, that the Grantee's duty to indemnify and hold harmless shall not include any claims or liability arising from the established sole negligence or willful misconduct of SANDAG, its Board of Directors, agents, officers, or employees. lntellectual Property. Upon request by SANDAG, the Grantee âgrees to indemnify, save, and hold harmless SANDAG and its Board of Directors, officers, agents, and employees acting within the scope of their official duties against any liability, including costs and expenses, resulting from any willful or intentional violation by the Grantee of proprietary rights, copyrights, or right of privacy, arising out of the publication, translalion, reproduction, delivery, use, or disposition of any data furnished underthe Project. The Grantee shall not be required to indemnify SANDAG for any such liability caused solely by the wrongful acts of SANDAG employees or êgents. 16 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 225 XVIII. INDEPENDENT CONTBACTOR Status of Grantee. Grantee shall perform the services provided for within this Agreement as an independent contractor, and not as an employee of SANDAG. Grantee shall be under the control of SANDAG as tô the result to be accomplished and not the means, and shall consult with SANDAG as provided for in the Scope of Work, The payments made to Grantee pursuant to this Agreement shall be the full and complete compensation to which Grantee is entitled. SANDAG shall not make any federal or state tax withholdings on behalf of Grantee. SANDAG shall not be required to pay any workers'compensation insurance on behalf of Grantee. Grantee agrees to indemnify SANDAG for any tax, retirement contribution, social security, overtime payment, or workers' compensation payment which SANDAG may be required to make on behalf of Grantee or any employee of Grantee for work done under this Agreement^ Act¡ons on behalf of SANDAG. Except as SANDAG may specify in writing, Grantee shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of SANDAG in any capacity whatsoever, as an agentor otherwise. Grantee shall have no authority, express or implied, to bind SANDAG or its members, agents, or employees, to any obligation whatsoever, unless expressly provided for in this Agreement. SEVERABILITY AND INTEGRATION A, B. XIX. lf any provision of the Agreement is determined invalid, the remainder of that Agreement shall not be affected if that remainder would continue to conform to the requirements of applicable laws or regulations. This Agreement represents the entire understanding of SANDAG and Grantee as to those matters contained in it. No prior oral or written understandlng shall be of any force or effect with respect to those matters covered hereunder. This Agreement may not be modified or altered except in writing, signed by SANDAG and the Grantee. XX. PROJECT MANAGER The Grantee has assigned David Tayloras the Project Manager for the Project. Project Manager continuity and experience is deemed essential in Grantee's ability to carry out the Proiect in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. Grantee shall not change the Project Manager without first providing written notice to SANDAG. xxt. NoTlcE Any notice or instrument required to be given or delivered by this Agreement may be given or delivered by depositing the same in any United States Post Office, registered or certified, postage prepaid, addressed to: San Diego Association of Governments 401 B Street, Suite 800 5an Diego, CA 92101 Attn; Susan Baldwin / Suchi Mukherjee Grantee; City of Chula Vista 276 Ath Avenue chula Visra, cA 91910 Attn: David Taylor 't7 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 226 Notice shall be effective upon receipt thereof' XXII. SIGNATURES The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities, lN WITNESS WHËREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date written above. SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVËRNMENTS CITY OF CHULA VISTA GATLEGOS Executive Director or des¡gnee APPROVED AS TO FÔRM;APPROVËD A5 I() ËÖRM: C¡ty Offlce of ,Clt! ftû'K- æ 18 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 227 ATTACHMENT A SCOPE OF WORK, SCHEDULE,AND APPROVED PROJECT BUDGET PLANNING/NON-CAPITAL PRolECÍS: SCOPE OF wORK, SCHEÞULË, AND SUDGEf Streeì Promenade Streebcapê Master Plðn project location ¡s an appro¡imatelY 1.?5 mile long segment of F Street of the of chulà visra. from Th¡rd Avenue lo BaV 0oulevild in the nodhwest extends"Promenade"theflotnaform¡ler.25 Fof TheStreer.PlanM¡ sernd segmenllo ng proposedVistachulodesi6nprel¡minary dràw¡ngsofprepareStree¡5côpeCity urban TheWildllfeNðt¡onal and maSteffuture communlly.prox¡m¡lyandofhomeeristinBRelugepl¡nnedanwestwürddistrictthecomrnSnl,I ayfroVlllaBeupCily's acce55be¡ter residenìs.for lhethesed¡5tìncttwo ofafe¡3 lhecteateandancrealetoCilyandd¡sìricl Baytrontthe O Þpo rtunily syoertYdowntowntheVrllageprov¡des areðcce!sibleallto u5ers of and they walking tak¡ngbicyclinB,and whetherilreet5'corrido regardless ¿ge ab¡litythethe"complete makintofwillF¡omenade deJ¡e¡edbe u5¡ng pr¡ncíples the ¿ddil¡onln thelofunandexerÊise5¡nleEctìve althroughout pfocess.the planned Folnìskeyw¡lhThelntendsco mmun¡ty workshopsshutìle,lhe driv¡ng.projeqt enBagefullyot of lhe street Ewould leadwhlch future complete lhrouBh capitaìhetofco¡lructìo n dßwings implementât¡onetfonlheinEludepreparalionprel¡minaryrvillPlan,Mãster the sustainableof elemenls ¡ ncludi ng;ofatea tncomelow-modeßte provl5lon desìgnconcentrallonanthro!8h¿5desiBnatedproject'j cool streetmðrkedconSilent¡anes;pavrnE elemeDts;fumishings;tEveldecorat¡ve crossinE!i blcyclerouteS;outsbulb Inlersectìons;pavers pedesllianparkways; rbanU Cofeandclâ5sforadd¡tion,ln thÊPlan willMaste r defìc¡encies b¡kevayr.addresslhereclassn0Streetscape planfheandtreesstreelb¡keviays.Currentlv, F ndAvenueTh¡rd tbeand StreetthervilhThewouldshutllebelweenu5¡nßBayfrootshuttle"Side llnk downlownthe gayfronl.loopPlanaident¡fìes "VJeJt VillagelucsP)n,slat¡oandwelltheÐstrans¡tEStreetlocalionsStreelFFifth Avenue 8roÐdw¡yatPl¡MastPr wouldn stop a longtrao5¡teal-westthe Thenkj stfeelSca pe potential¡denlìfyas ìhelnto heallhymatuletoevaluatedenhancedaccommodateaodEx¡sl¡nB8ðytront.¡nd tE¡N be lnvil¡nB entrywaYslnìerstateof5adj¿cenl ovÊfcfos5rngcrosSingpûrâllelfreeway overhead wo uldlin es be beto cedlhelntotheme,ut¡l¡ly proposed plôbervouldforev¡lualed and incorpoEled 9lreet5caPeThirdfromt0ÀvcnueBoulevardpreserualionBaY olherandlônetßm¡tandofn confìguralions,5t0p5,pôrkways,olherîo(el e mcnts.exa ctThelocal¡on contìEUEtio bikeways,sidewalks,free the designupilreetscape downtownthe ndenhancemenlScrealêVil la Be Bay lron l,providePlan.Master mulli-modal Breater synergy betìveenTheamen¡t¡e5 detalledbe tho Streetsc¡peby residentsschoolnd children.theto and localforshunlelocaloneflomdestin¿t¡on olhet acce5slblllty¡mproveor 1ûke the$roll,bicycle, project (the CIP ir not part of th¡s aPplicûtion). ìmpart would beùutlfy an existing bllghtcd area 19 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 228 :j:ir: M;;ih it:ir' : NotiËeto Prccêed::i: l'!IflY:r$,-ll' i Meet¡ng No¡es]A Prcjecl or¡enlotion/Klck o¡l MeeIing IMeet¡ng Noìes1CStoJÍ Cootd¡t otíon Meet¡ng L';; i=.:;,.:;::,;,tt' g¡,¡i9s;qq¡:;li.. n¡¿¡tti 13,i:. i,:: ::: Möäth 151:..:,::rr '',:ì:l::3Months:-':Sës 2A.E.:.:,r,:.: ::ìj., l::;:.'.:it,:ir:.,'J':Ì:.srr¡;aryir. .'' ,, ,f i ¡¡ -,,,'h.,:r-"tr.'. Exist¡ng condit¡ons ond sÌte Anrlviir n¿uur IExls¡lng CondîÌion¡/Doto Colleclíon s 156,019,00$Monlh 16 Month 22 7 Months5eê 3A-E,concepluål DeslSn sWoùshop Sumrnory Noles; PoverPo¡n¡: Hondovtss e Eond Co m muni ry w o r 16 hop3B s .', -:Meetlno No¡Pst:'. - l: i':'::': ,;ii': - Bicvcle Adviiory Commîtlee Meel¡ng: : . ':'3C IRelîned Conceplúl Des¡9n; oesigñ 5*e¡ches3Dñel¡ne 'lrceßcope Concepls ond Design Nterno¡ivcs rn;,rucoir.rnitydorkshop', : it i. , TASK DESCRIPTIOII¡TASK NO.OEUVÉRAEIES:SIART DURATIONI 20 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 229 4 stßeBcaPe Mastor Plarì Sèe4A-E Month æ Mûnth 30 8 Month5 s 95,585.O0 4A :. e Meiter Plon:' :, jii.:.,.::::,'i.t:,::::i: ; ', :,'',':,'',' -,' l'i i,:i. l.:: I r'l.ij )::-iiri :r ::: __r- ii:i.:::':::: 48 Foutt h Commu nl ty W ot kshoP Worlshop Suñmory No¡es: PorverPo¡nt; Hondouls 5 ,i:iit:4C,ii.:;i' 40 Finol Gtopltîc Plon ond Norrcùve Fínol Streetsûpe MosÌer Ploo 5 Prcllmlnary Construction Dr.w¡n8s see sA-C Month 31 Monlh 36 6 Months $107,648.00 :::,i 5Al otoinaqà: sì,idy.::,'.:, :.:.1.i.;-i.'.1, ,r. j::.lfi 1.:.: .::; :'onihøqè Stitíy.'..t;;;,: l l:t',,,rr,,;. -. '-. .. r..:.lif:.;i,l :',.. 5B âeol Propeny Suryey Suryey Report 5 .::i;':ic¡' 21 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 230 6 Project Overslght 5ee 6A-C Month 1 Monlh 36 3Ê Months I È,500.00 68 QúilIerly Repoîs tD SANDAG Quoneily ßepoîs I 6C:f ::Projèû closÞ.:ôù¡. : : . : .: :r: :r' : ::'i::r'.;.":i:. i:i i*!!t"i, r:!u.¡!.ii eportr :,:: jiiji.';i ;::lt .j::.li' DURATION NTP s ,1 ' i...:: r.:. -...:..'' :;:.:..-' ..:.i'':r,:.:.ìillr:ir:i:: TolAL :,i 36Mohihs $.,.,,.:t,,..,,' ..:..,-: ¡Sí'ôô0.ôO 'Sr¿n and Completlon dîtes shall be tEcked urlnB "Monlhs frcm Notlce to Þmceed {NTP)" "¡ndicates SANDAG Board Policy No. 0:¡5 Mìlestone losl<ÞEtall,olsoonodted,lndudesdesulpüonsloreoch,øsk.Asoresul oÍlheAfÞ-fmzsMetfund¡Dgswop,reJercrrestoC4¿IRÂlVSshouldbeunde¡stoôdosrelerencesto fosk detø¡l|et 68 should he undersloôd B quorlerly progress reqotÊ lo SANDAG' PROJECT COSI:s s18.345.00 s 49r,000.00 s 2.7,345,00 AI GRANT AMOUNT REQUESTED FROM SANOAGI At MATCH AMOUNTTHATwlLL BE CONIflIBIjTEDI CONTRIBUTIoNT 22 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 231 ATÎACHMENT B 035BOARD POJ,ÏCY NO. COMPETITIVE GRJANT FROGRAI4 PROCEDUR.ES Applicabílity and Purpose of Poliqy This Policy applies to all grant programs adminilered through SANDAG, whether from ?.ransNet or another source, including but not limited to the Smart Growth lncentive Program, Environmental Mitigation Program, Bike and Pedestrian Program, Senior Mini Grant Program, Federal Transit Administration grênt programt and Active Transportation Grant Program' Nothing in this Policy is intended lo supersede federal or state grant rules, regulations, statutes, or contract documents that conflict with the requirements in this Policy. There are never enough government grant funds to pay for all of the projects worthy of funding in the 5an Diego region. For this reason, SANDAG awards grant funds on a competitive basis that takes the grantees' abilíty to perform their proposed project on a timely basis into account. SANDAG intends to hold grantees accountable to the project schedules they have proposed in order to ensure fairness in the competitive process and encouragê grântees to get their projects implemented quickly so that the publìc can benefit from the project deliverables as soon as possibfe. Procedures Project Milestone and Completion Deadlines 1.1. When signing a grant agreement for a competitive program funded and/or administered by SANDAG, grant recipients must agree to the project delivery objectives and schedules in the agreement. ln addition, â grantee's proposal must contain a schedule that falls within the follow¡ng deadlines. Failure to meet the deadlines below may result in revocation of all grant funds not already expended. The final invoice for capital, planning, or operatìons grants must be submitted prior to the applicable deadline. 1-1 .1 . Funding for Capìtal Projects. lf the grant will fund a capital project, the project must be completed according to the schedule provided in the grant agreement, but at the latest, any necessary construction contract must be awarded within two years followlng execution of the grant agreement, and construction must be completed within eighteen months following award of the construction contract. Completion of construction for purposes of thìs policy shall be when the prìme construction contractor is relieved from its maintenance responsibilities. lf no construqtion contract award Ís necessary, the construction projecl must be complete within eighteen months following execution of the grant agreement. 1.1 .2. Fundlng for Planning Grants. lf the grant will fund planning, the project must be completed according to the schedule provÌded in the grant agreement, but at the latest, any necessary consultant contract must be awarded within one year following execution of the grant agreement, and the planning project must be 23 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 232 2. complete withÍn two years following award of the consultant contract. Completion of planning for purposes of this policy shall be when grantee approves the final planning project deliverable. lf no consultant conträcl award is necessary, the planning project must be complete within two years of execution of the grant agreement. 1.1.3 Funding for Operations Grants. lf the grant will fund operations, the project must be completed according to the schedule provided in the grant agreement, but ät the latest, any necessary services contract for operations must be awarded within one year {ollowing execution of the grant agreement, and the operations must commence within síx months following award of lhe operations contract. lf no services contract for operations is necessary, the operations project must commence withln one year of execution of the grant agreement. 1.1.4 Funding for Equipment or Vehicles Grants. lf the grant will fund equipment or vehicles, the project must be completed according to the schedule provided in the grant agreement, but at the latest, any necessary purchase contrads for equipment or vehiCles must be awarded within one year following execution of the grant agreement, and use of the equipment or vehicles for the benefit of the public must commence within six months following award of the purchase contract. Project Milestone and Completion Deadline Extensions 2.1 . Schedules with¡n grant agreements may include project scopes and schedules that wíll identify interim milestones in addìtion to those described in Section 1 of this Policy. Grant recipients may receive extensions on their project schedules of up to six months for good cause. Êrtensions of up to six months aggregate that would not cause the project to miss a completion deadline in Section 1 may be approved by the SANDAG Executive Direstor. Extensions beyond six months aggregate or that would cause the project to miss a completion deadline in Sestion 1 must be approved by the Policy Advisory Committee that has been delegated the necessary authority by the Board, For an extension to be granted under this Section 2, the following conditions must be met: 2.1.1 . For extension requests of up to six months, the grantee must request the extension in writing to the SANDAG Program Manager at least two weeks prior to the earliest project schedule milestone deadline for which an extension is being requested. The Executive Director or designee will determine whether the ertension should be granted. The Executive Director's astion will be reported out to the Board in following month's report of delegated actions. 2.1 .?. A grantee seeking an extension must document previous efforts undertaken to maintain the project schedule. explain the reasons for the delay, explain why the delay is unavoidable, and demonstrate an ability to succeed in the extended time frame the grantee proposes. 2.1 .3. lf the Executive Director denies an extens¡on request under this Section 2, the grantee may appeal within ten business days of receiving the Executive Director's response to the responsible Policy Advisory Committee by sending the appeal to the SANDAG Program Manager. 24 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 233 3 2.1 .4. Extension requests that are rejected by the Policy Advisory Committee will result in termínation of the grant agreement and obligation by the grantee to return to SANDAG âny unexpended funds within 30 days. Unexpended funds are funds for project costs not incurred pr¡or to rejection of the extension request by the Policy Advisory Committee. Project Delays and Extensions in Excess of Six Months 3.1. Requests for extensions in excess of six months, orthatwill cause a projectto miss a completion deadline in Section 1 (including those projects that were already granted extensions by the Executive Director and are again falling behind schedule), will be considered by the Policy ,Advisory Committee upon request to the SANDAG Program Manager. 3.2 A grantee seeking an e)dension must document previous efforts undertaken to maintain the project schedule, explain the reasons for the delay, explain why the delay is unavoidable, and demonstrate an ability to succeed in the extended time frame the grântee proposes. The grantee must provide the necessary information to SANDAG staff to place in a report to the Policy Advisory Committee, lf sufficient time is available, and the grant utilized lransruet funds, the request will first be taken to the lndependent Taxpayer Advisory Committee (ITOC) for a recommendation. The grantee should make a representative available at the meeting to present the information to, andior answer questions from. the ITOC and Policy Advisory Committee. 3.3 The Policy Advisory Committee wìll only grant an extension under this Section 3 for extenuating c¡rcumstances that the grantee could not have reasonably foreseen. Resolution and Executìon of the Grant Agreement 4.1 Two weeks prior to the review by the Policy Advisory Committee of the proposed grants, prospective grantees must submit a resolution from their authorized governing body that includes the provisions in this Subsection 4.1. Failure to provide a resolution that meets the requirements in this Subsection 4.1 will result in rejection of the application and the application will be dropped from consideration with funding going to the next project as scored by the evaluation committee. ln order to assist grantees in meeting this resolution deadline, when SANDAG issues the call for projects it wîll allow at least 90 days for grant application submission. 4.1 .1 Grantee governing body commits to providing the amount of matching funds set forth in the grant application. 4.1 .Z Grantee governing body authorizes staff to accept the grant funding and execute a grant agreement if an award is made by S,ANDAG' 4.2 Grantee's authorized representative must execute the grant agreement within 45 days from the date SANDAG presents the grant agreement to the prospective grantee for execution. Failure to meet the requìrements in this Subsection 4.2 may result in revocation of the grant award. 4. 25 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 234 5. lncreased Availability of Funding Under this Policy 5,1. Grant funds made available as a result of the procedures in this PolÌcy may be awarded to the next project on the recommended project priority list from the most recent project selection process, or may be added to the funds available for the next project funding cycle, at the responsible Policy Advisory Committee's discretion. Any project that loses funding due to failure to meet the deadlines specified in this Polícy may be resubmitled to compete for funding in a future call for grant applícations. Adopted: January 2010 Amended; November 2014 26 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 235 ATTACHMENT C PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION AND OVERSIGHT REQUIREMENTS Capital Grants l. Contact lnformation: Grantee must provide SANDAG with contact information for the project manager. Grantee must provide SANDAG with updated contact information in a timely manner if there are any changes to staff assigned. Z. Baseline Data Collection: Prior to the construction of grant-funded improvements, the Grantee is responsible for developing a baseline data collection plan with SANDAG to gather information on pedestrian and bicyclist a6tiv¡ty. At a minimum, data should be collected for observed bicycle and pedestrian volumes, behavíor, and attitudes in the project area. Once the data collection plan is approved by SANDAG staff, the Grantee is responsible for carrying out the plan and returning collected data to SANDAC as a deliverable. Standardized forms required for data collection will be provided by SANDAG. Grantees are encouraged to usethe National Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation Project methodology and plan for lhe following: . Conduct counts prior to project construction, during National Documental¡on Days in the second week of September. 5upplementary counts and surveys (an be conducted during January May, and July to provide seasonal data, if desired. . Conduct counts for two hours, at peak times relative to the facility. For example, facilities attracting utilitarian trips should be counted on a Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday from 5to 7 p.m., whereas facilities attracting recreationaltrips should be counled on a Saturday, from 9 to 11 a.m, ln the case that the above timeframes are deemed infeasible due to the project schedule, the Grantee and SANDAG will collaborate on an alternative data collection methodology and procedure. A subset of Grantees may be selected for in-depth evaluation by SANDAG, in which case, SANDAG will conduct the data collection effort with required participation from 6rantee staff. Such in-depth evaluation conducted by SANDAG will take place solely for the purpose of SANDAG Active Transportation data collection and monitoring efforts, and will not impact Grantees'budgets, Grantees should plan to budget five thousand dollars ($5,000) for data collection. For questions or assistance with data collection, contact Christine Eary at christine.eary@sandag.org, or (619) 699-6928. 3. Design Development and Communit¡r Meetings: Grðntee must provide SANDAG with advance notice (preferably within two weeks) and agendas of all design development and community meetings, and a meeting summary following the meeting. SANDAG staff may attend any meetings as appropriate. 27 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 236 4. Plan Review: Grantee must submit project design drawings and cost estimates (if available) to SANDAG for review and comment at 30 percent, 60 percent, 90 percent, and 100 percent. SANDAG staff may meet with the Grantee to comment on submified plans and assure substantiaì conformance. SANDAG may comment on submitted plans regarding: . Whether they are consistent with the Project proposed in the original grant application, and ¡ Consístency with accepted pedestrian/bicycle facility and smart growth design standards. 5. Quarterly Reports and lnvoices: Grantee must submit quarterly reports and invoices to SANDAG, detailing accomplishments in the quarter, anticipated progress next quarter, pending issues and actions toward resolution, and status of budget and schedule. Furthermore, the Grantee agrees to provide pro.iect milestone information (such as presentations to community groups, other agencies, and elected officials, ground-breakings, and ribbon-cuttings) 1o support media and communications efforts. 6. Media and Communit¡l Outreach Coordination: Press materlals shall be provided to SANDAG staff before they are distributed. SANDAG logo(s) should be included in press materials and other project collateral. Furthermore, the grantee agrees to provide project milestone information to support media and communications efforts. 7, Photo Documentation: Grantees are responsible for the following photo documentation: . Before and after photos, which should be taken from similar angles to showcase how a particular area has been transformed over time. . Project milestone photos (such as ground-breakings and ribbon-cuttings). . Photos taken throughout construction phases and throughout the length of the project. Photos should be high resolution (at least 4 inches by 6 inches with a minimum of 300 pixels per inch) and contain captions with project descriptions. dates, locations, and the names of those featured, if appropriate, 8. Proiect Signage: Each project or program in excess of $250,000 funded in whole or in parl by revenues from the TransNet Extension Ordinance shall be clearly designated during its construction or implementation as being provided by such revenues. SANDAG will provide sign specifications. Grantee agrees to follow sign specifications and submit proof files to SANDAG for approval before printing. 9. Performance Monitoring: SANDAG staff may measure performance of the constructed capital improvements against stated project objectives, and evaluate the overall grant program, Grantee is expected to meet with 5ANDAG staff to ídentify relevant performance measures and data sources, and provide available data and feedback regarding the program as appropriate. 28 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 237 Planning and Non-Capital Grants l. Contact lnformation. Grantee must provide SANDAG with contact information for the project manager. Grantee must provide SANDAG with updated contact information in a timely mânner if there are any changes to staff assigned. Z. Request for Proposals and Consultant.Selection, Upon request by SANDAG, Grantee must submit consultant draft Request for Proposals to SANDAG staff for review and comment for consistency with the agreed upon Scope of Work with SANDAG (Attaçhment A)' 3. Quarterly Reports. Grantee must submit quarterly reports to SANDAG, detailing accomplishments in the quarter, anticipated progress next quarter, pending issues and actions toward resolution, and status of budget and schedule. 4. Stakeholder and Communityr Meetings. Grantee must provide SANDAG with advance notice (preferably within two weeks) and agendas of all stakeholder and community meetíngs, and a meeting summary following the meeting. SANDAG staff may attend any meetings as appropriale. 5. Media and Communit¡l Outreach Coordination. Press materials shall be provided to SANDAG staff before they are distributed. SANDAG logo(s) should be included in press materials and other project collateral. Furthermore, the Grantee agrees to provide project milestone information to support media and communications efforts' 6. Photo Documentation. Grantees are responsible for the following photo documentation: . Existing condítions photos, which should illustrate the current conditions of the project site and demonstrate the need for improved facilities . Project milestone photos (such as workshops, presentations to community groups, other agencies, and elected officials) Photos should be high resolution {at least 4 inches by 6 inches with a minimum of 300 pixels per inch) and contain captíons with project descriptions, dates, locations, and the names of those featured, if appropriate. 29 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 238 ATTACHMENT D QUARTERLY REPORT AND INVOICE FORMS TransNet Active Transportation Grant Program QuarterlY RePort Report Submittal Date: Unsertl Reporting Period: llnsert - Ëxample: FY 2014, Quarter 1] PART 1: DESCRIPTION OF ACTlVlry FOR REPORTING PERIOD 1. Work Accomplished This Reporting Period IINSTRUCTIONS: Replace this text with a detailed description of work completed and underway during the reporting period. ln a bullet format, reference specific tasks.l Example: Task 1 - Award Consultant Contract: lssued RFP and convened a seleqtion panel of 5 members from the city, MTS, NTCD, and SANDAG to shortlist 3 of 9 firms. The panel intervíewed the 3 firms and selected XYZ Group for this project. The City Council approved the consultant contract with XYZ Group on January 1,2014. C¡ty staff held a kick-off meeting on January 10,2014. Task 2 - Public Outreach: City staff and XYZ Group began organizing the first workshop for this project. The anticipated date of the first workshop will be in the February/March 201 4 timeframe. Task 3 - Etc. Task 4 - Etc. 2, Deliverables Produced This Reporting Period IINSTRUCTION5: Summarize the deliverables produced during this period and indicate the date submitted to SANDA6, Deliverables can be submitted as an attachment to this report, See ltem 5 for more details.l Example: Final RFP - Submitted in December 2014. Approved Consultant Contra(t and Kick-Off Meeting Notes - Submitted with this report' Please see accompanying list of attachments. a ô a D I 30 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 239 3. ls there an accompanying invoice for this period? iINSTRUCTIoNS: lndicate YES or NO'ì 4. Work Anticipated for the Next Reporting Period [INSTRUCTION5: Replace this text with a brief descríption of work anticipated for the next reporting period. Also note any upcoming meetings or workshops.l 5. List of Attachments tINSTRUCTIONS: List any deliverables or invoice documents attached to this report. Attachments over 6MB should be sent via WeÏransfer.l WeTransfer Link: sandag.wetransfer.com/ Example: . Attachment 'l : Consultant Contract . Attachment 2: Kick-Off Meeting Notes o Attachment 3: lnvoice Spreadsheet r Attachment 4: lnvoice Documentation PART 2: SCHEDULE AND TASK STATUS Scheduled NïP Date Task 1 lmm/dd/YYl lmm/dd/YYl fln Progresl Completed/ Not Startedl lon Time/ Delavedl tmm/ddþl lmm/ddiyyl Task 2: Policy No.035 Milestone Imm/dd/yy]Imm/dd/yyl [ln Progress/ Completed/ Not Startedl lon Tíme/ Delayed j lmm/dd/yyl lmm/dd/yyl Task 3: Policy No.035 Milestone lmm/dd/Wl lmm/dd/YYl Iln Progresl Completed/ Not Startedl Ion Time/ DelayedJ lnrm/dd/yyl Imm/dd/yy] 31 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 240 PART 3: CHALLENGES, SCHEDULE DELAYS, AND AMENDMENT REQUEsTS Challenges and Actions Toward Resolution (lf applicable) [INSTRUCI.IONS: lf you are experiencing challenges in completing project tasks, please provide information about the delay and actions taken to resolve issues. lf an amendment is needed, provide justification and check the appropriate box below.l f] No amendment requested at this time I Amendment requested to*: I Project Schedule fl Pro¡ea Budget I scope of Work *Faílure to clreck a box in the aboye section assurnes tl¡ere is no actíon requested. Amendment reguesb åre subject to SANDAG's approval. rt is the Grantee's responsibilíty to ensure complìance wìth SANDAG Eoard policy No, 035: Competít¡ve Grant Program Procedures and grant agreement terms and conditìons' PI\RT 4: PROJECT STATUS REPORT SIGNATURE Prepared by Date Project Manager 32 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 241 rwnrctr tNqlRt tnTlôNs _- _ "ç_o1tìl{!nn!_gl ptitl_o.yt- fiolt !.¡9 Prû-iecl9 ln?ryi4 eqg9gllils ly9!9m 9folvils that tunds,y-çR dilÞltm-gd,- 'öóniä"ijr iósis st¡oulo be suppoded by the contÉctor inwice, schedule of çlues, AND a pool of payment. The prDof ot paymBñt can copy of tha check pÉlided lo the 0f lhe chæk : olher cosls shoutd be ;uppo,l;J bt;iilei ãn inùice trom the wndor or a reæipt AND musl be èccompanied by a proof ol paymenl. The proof of paymenl can be eilher a -c9py -ollhq pq¡qd conlñbrd¡on, ãnd retenlion sq atq rants@ saJl qgl.orq 9¡gn and scân lhe Slgn and,scan lhe - s!l-Þrni! rspæ.4i¡s Prcgress Report, 9qÞmi! i! i! PoJ it in PDF fom. ln excess of 6MB should be submitted vla: 33 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 242 Slafl Peßon C t!f!9FBJâpDngNAl llNF9 ¡!n/qd/-Y.Y. !C '!m/qd/yy lomm/dd/yy Houß rmonth ofJanuary 2014 2 2lll2ol4tPrcfesslonal sen¡ces for lhe iDgllÌ' 9l feÞryqy ,?P113: 31112014 Professlonal seN?es lor lhâ monlh of Maßh 2014 3/l/2014 OutEach trDm Jenuary ?014 to March 2014 consultant/Co ntfztctor Consultanl XYZ Consu¡lanl )(YZ x/z Oùlreach Orgaô¡zãl¡on ABC Vendor ltlreieelle:". . !.tvgleg-qeF E-lsiPllerelç.olF1 1/1/2014, Profess¡onal senices lor lhe s 10,000.00 s 10,000.00 YEs,No s 10,000.00 s i0,000.00 YEslNo lnvo¡ce No.lnvo¡ce Date Dêt-qjPlig¡ glçStF _ Atllg-llt Printing cosls lor Januery 20'14 S 100 00 Documenlat¡on Attàched? YES/NO111112014,Vendor A 1 A1 t2014 ,February 2014 Woúshop z28l2014'Snacks fór Febu¿ry 2ol4 ,W.o,(lipR Nws Announcemeni lor 100,00 YESTNO Vendor B s 10000 YEs/No Ve ndor AODITO¡¡AL LINES AS NEEDED] 34 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 243 IRÁ¡VSIVET SMART GROWTH ROGRAM INVOICE : : E¡olgqt Llamg¡ :tPî9.,rFqI N.AI,Eì ConFrcl Numbon: 6ooxÐ( . INCENTIVE P .SÂNDAG 40t B Sreot, Sultô 800 san Dlego. CA s2101-423 1 , Fmm: I FROM TO DATE s0 00 so ofTâsk 1 lãEk ?so Iâsk 3 s0.o( soffIask 4 f¡çk 5 so TOTÄL 50.ot ÂNDAG GEnÈ s0.0( rbh:50.o( nÁñHh,'HôÀ.¿ SANDAG *nÀ/rôl dDtv/0! 35 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 244 gñìnlpelom 8næ ol lhe wôrk requiledlhal the aboÉ amounts evid;næ¡ biálbchãà iupporting ¿oo¡mons in¿ 36 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 245 1 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 160971 Consultant Name: Moore Iacofano Goltsman (MIG), Inc.Rev. 8/23/16 CITY OF CHULA VISTA CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH MOORE IACOFANO GOLTSMAN (MIG), INC. TO PROVIDE URBAN DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE F STREET PROMENADE STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN This Agreement is entered into effective as of September 20, 2016 (“Effective Date”) by and between the City of Chula Vista, a chartered municipal corporation (“City”) andMoore Iacofano Goltsman (MIG), Inc.,a California corporation, (“Consultant”) (collectively, the “Parties” and, individually, a “Party”) with reference to the following facts: RECITALS WHEREAS,City was awarded funding through the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) TransNetActive Transportation Grant Program (ATGP) forthe preparation of the F Street Promenade Streetscape Master Plan (“Project”)and subsequently entered into an Agreement with SANDAGin August 2015; and WHEREAS, City requires urban design services for the preparation of the Project, locatedon F Street from Third Avenue to Bay Boulevard;and WHEREAS,In order to procure these services City solicited proposals in accordance with Chula Vista Municipal Code Sections2.56.110 for professional services,received threeproposals,and selected Consultant as the most qualified amongst those submitting; and WHEREAS, Consultant warrants and represents that it is experienced and staffed in a manner such that it can deliver the services required of Consultant to City in accordance withthe time frames and the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 246 2 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 160971 Consultant Name: Moore Iacofano Goltsman (MIG), Inc.Rev. 8/23/16 OBLIGATORY PROVISIONS NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals, the covenants contained herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which the Parties hereby acknowledge, City and Consultant hereby agree as follows: 1. SERVICES 1.1 Required Services. Consultant agrees to perform the services, and deliver to City the “Deliverables” (if any)described in the attached ExhibitA,incorporated into the Agreementby this reference, within the time frames set forth therein, time being of the essence for this Agreement. The services and/or Deliverables described in Exhibit A shall be referred to herein as the “Required Services.” 1.2 Reductions in Scope of Work. City may independently, or upon request from Consultant, from time to time, reduce the Required Services to be performed by the Consultant under this Agreement. Upon doing so, City and Consultant agree to meet and confer in good faith for the purpose of negotiating a corresponding reduction in the compensation associated with the reduction. 1.3 Additional Services. Subject to compliance with the City’sCharter, codes, policies, proceduresand ordinances governing procurement and purchasing authority, City may request Consultant provide additional services related to the Required Services (“Additional Services”). If so, City and Consultant agree to meet and confer in good faith for the purpose of negotiating an amendment to Exhibit A, to add the Additional Services. Unless otherwise agreed, compensation for the Additional Services shall be charged and paid consistent with the rates and terms already provided therein. Once added to Exhibit A, “Additional Services” shall also become “Required Services” for purposes of this Agreement. 1.4 Standard of Care. Consultant expressly warrants and agrees thatany and all Required Services hereunder shall be performed in accordance with the highest standard of care exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in similar locations. 1.5No Waiver of Standard of Care. Where approval by City is required, it is understood to be conceptual approval only and does not relieve the Consultant of responsibility for complying with all laws, codes, industry standards, and liability for damages caused by negligent acts, errors, omissions, noncompliance with industry standards, or the willful misconduct of the Consultant or its subcontractors. 1.6Security for Performance. In the event that Exhibit A Section 4 indicates the need for Consultant to provide additional security for performance of its duties under this Agreement, Consultant shall provide such additional security prior to commencement of its Required Services in the form and on the terms prescribed on Exhibit A, or as otherwise prescribed by the City Attorney. 1.7Compliance with Laws.In its performance of the Required Services, Consultant shall comply with any and all applicable federal, state and local laws, including the Chula Vista Municipal Code. 1.8Business License. Prior to commencement of work, Consultant shall obtain a business license from City. 1.9 Subcontractors. Prior to commencement of any work, Consultant shall submit for City’s information and approval a list of any and all subcontractors to be used by Consultant in the performance of the Required Services. Consultant agrees to take appropriate measures necessary to ensure that all 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 247 3 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 160971 Consultant Name: Moore Iacofano Goltsman (MIG), Inc.Rev. 8/23/16 subcontractors and personnel utilized by the Consultant to complete its obligations under this Agreement comply with all applicable laws, regulations, ordinances, and policies, whether federal, state, or local. In addition, if any subcontractor is expected to fulfill any responsibilities of the Consultant under this Agreement, Consultant shall ensure that each and every subcontractor carries out the Consultant’s responsibilities as set forth in this Agreement. 1.10 Term. This Agreement shall commence on the earlier to occur of the Effective Date or Consultant’s commencement of the Required Services hereunder, and shall terminate when the Parties have complied with all their obligations hereunder; provided, however, provisions which expressly survive termination shall remain in effect. 2.COMPENSATION 2.1 General. For satisfactory performance of the Required Services, City agrees to compensate Consultant in the amount(s) and on the terms set forth in Exhibit A, Section 3. Standardterms for billing and payment are set forth in this Section 2. 2.2Detailed Invoicing.Consultant agrees to provide Citywitha detailed invoice for servicesperformed each month, within thirty (30) days ofthe end of the month in which the services were performed, unless otherwise specified in Exhibit A. Invoicing shall begin on the first of the month following the Effective Date of the Agreement. All charges must be presented in a line item format with each task separately explained in reasonable detail. Each invoice shall include the current monthly amount being billed, the amount invoiced to date, and the remaining amount available under any approved budget. Consultant must obtain prior written authorization from City for any fees or expenses that exceed the estimated budget. 2.3Payment to Consultant. Upon receipt of a properly prepared invoiceand confirmation that the Required Services detailed in the invoice have been satisfactorily performed, City shall payConsultant for the invoice amountwithin thirty (30) days. Payment shall be made in accordance withthe terms and conditions set forth in ExhibitAand section 2.4, below. At City’s discretion, invoices not timely submitted may be subject to a penalty of up to five percent (5%) of the amount invoiced. 2.4Retention Policy.City shall retain ten percent (10%)of the amount due for Required Services detailed on each invoice (the “holdback amount”). Upon City review and determination of Project Completion, the holdback amount will be issued to Consultant. 2.5Reimbursement of Costs. City may reimburse Consultant’s out-of-pocket costs incurred by Consultant in the performance of the Required Services if negotiated in advance and included in Exhibit A. Unless specifically provided in Exhibit A, Consultant shall be responsible forany and all out-of-pocket costs incurred by Consultant in the performance of the Required Services. 2.6Exclusions. City shall not be responsible for payment to Consultant for any fees or costs in excess of any agreed upon budget, rate or other maximum amount(s) provided for in Exhibit A. City shall also not be responsible for any cost: (a) incurred prior to the Effective Date; or (b) arising out of or related to the errors, omissions, negligence or acts of willful misconduct of Consultant, its agents, employees, or subcontractors. 2.7Payment Not Final Approval. Consultant understands and agrees that payment to the Consultant or reimbursement for any Consultant costs related to the performance of Required Services does not constitute a City final decision regarding whether such payment or cost reimbursement is allowable and eligible for 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 248 4 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 160971 Consultant Name: Moore Iacofano Goltsman (MIG), Inc.Rev. 8/23/16 payment under this Agreement, nor does it constitute a waiver of any violation by Consultant of the terms of this Agreement. If City determines that Consultant is not entitled to receive any amount of compensation already paid, City will notify Consultant in writing and Consultant shall promptly return such amount. 3.INSURANCE 3.1 Required Insurance. Consultant must procure and maintain, during the period of performance of Required Services under this Agreement, and for twelve months after completion of Required Services, the policies of insurance described on the attached Exhibit B,incorporated into the Agreementby this reference (the “Required Insurance”). The Required Insurance shall also comply with all other termsof this Section. 3.2 Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions relating to the Required Insurance must be disclosed to and approved by City in advance of the commencement of work. 3.3 Standards for Insurers. Required Insurance must be placed with licensed insurers admitted to transact business in the State of California with a current A.M. Best’s rating of A V or better, or, if insurance is placed with a surplus lines insurer, insurer must be listedon the State of California List of Eligible Surplus Lines Insurers (LESLI) with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A X. For Workers’Compensation Insurance, insurance issued by the State Compensation Fund is also acceptable. 3.4 Subcontractors. Consultant must include all sub-consultants/sub-contractors as insureds under its policies and/or furnish separate certificates and endorsements demonstrating separate coverage for those not under its policies. Any separate coverage for sub-consultants must also comply with the terms of this Agreement. 3.5Additional Insureds. City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers must be named as additional insureds with respect to any policy of general liability, automobile, or pollution insurance specified as required in Exhibit B or as may otherwise be specified by City’s Risk Manager.. The general liability additional insured coverage must be provided in the form of an endorsement to the Consultant’s insurance using ISO CG 2010 (11/85) or its equivalent; such endorsement must not exclude Products/Completed Operations coverage. 3.6General Liability Coverage to be “Primary.”Consultant’s general liability coverage must be primary insurance as it pertains to the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers is wholly separate from the insurance provided by Consultant and in no way relieves Consultant from its responsibility to provide insurance. 3.7No Cancellation.No Required Insurance policy may be canceled by either Party during the required insured period under this Agreement, except after thirty days’ prior written notice to the City by certified mail, return receipt requested. Prior to the effective date of any such cancellation Consultant must procure and put intoeffect equivalent coverage(s). 3.8Waiver of Subrogation. Consultant’s insurer(s) will provide a Waiver of Subrogation in favor of the City for each Required Insurance policy under this Agreement. In addition, Consultant waives any right it may haveor may obtain to subrogation for a claim against City. 3.9Verification of Coverage. Prior to commencement of any work, Consultant shall furnish City with original certificates of insurance and any amendatory endorsements necessary to demonstrate to City that 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 249 5 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 160971 Consultant Name: Moore Iacofano Goltsman (MIG), Inc.Rev. 8/23/16 Consultant has obtained the Required Insurance in compliance with the terms ofthis Agreement. The words “will endeavor” and “but failure to mail such notice shall impose no obligation or liability of any kind upon the company, its agents, or representatives” or any similar language must be deleted from all certificates. The required certificates and endorsements should otherwise be on industry standard forms. The City reserves the right to require, at any time, complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements evidencing the coverage required by these specifications. 3.10Claims Made Policy Requirements. If General Liability, Pollution and/or Asbestos Pollution Liability and/or Errors & Omissions coverage are required and are provided on a claims-made form, the following requirements also apply: a.The “Retro Date” must be shown, and must be before the date of this Agreement or the beginning of the work required by this Agreement. b.Insurance must be maintained, and evidence of insurance must be provided, for at least five (5) years aftercompletion of the work required by this Agreement. c.If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a “Retro Date” prior to the effective date of this Agreement, the Consultant must purchase “extended reporting” coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of the work required by this Agreement. d.A copy of the claims reporting requirements must be submitted to the City for review. 3.11Not a Limitation of Other Obligations. Insuranceprovisions under this section shall not be construed to limit the Consultant’s obligations under this Agreement, including Indemnity. 3.12Additional Coverage. To the extent that insurance coverage provided by Consultant maintains higher limits thanthe minimums appearing in Exhibit B, City requires andshall be entitled to coverage for higher limits maintained. 4. INDEMNIFICATION 4.1. General. To the maximum extent allowed by law, Consultant shall protect, defend, indemnify and hold harmless City, its elected and appointed officers, agents, employees and volunteers (collectively, “Indemnified Parties”), from and against any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, (including reasonable attorneys’ fees and court costs), liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of or incident to any alleged acts, omissions, negligence, or willful misconduct of Consultant, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and contractors, arising out of or in connection with the performance of the Required Services, the results of such performance, or this Agreement. This indemnity provision does not include any claims, damages, liability, costs and expenses arisingfrom the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnified Parties. Also covered is liability arising from, connected with, caused by or claimed to be caused by the active or passive negligent acts or omissions of the Indemnified Parties which may be in combination with the active or passive negligent acts or omissions of the Consultant, its employees, agents or officers, or any third party. 4.2. Modified Indemnity Where Agreement Involves Design Professional Services. Notwithstanding the forgoing, if the services provided under this Agreement are design professional services, as defined by 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 250 6 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 160971 Consultant Name: Moore Iacofano Goltsman (MIG), Inc.Rev. 8/23/16 California Civil Code section 2782.8, as may be amended from time to time, the defense and indemnity obligation under Section 1, above, shall be limited to theextent required by California Civil Code section 2782.8. 4.3 Costs of Defense and Award. Included in Consultant’s obligations under this Section 4is Consultant’s obligation to defend, at Consultant’s own cost, expense and risk, any and all suits, actions or other legal proceedings that may be brought or instituted against one or more of the Indemnified Parties. Subject to the limitations in this Section 4, Consultant shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against one or more of the Indemnified Parties for any and all related legal expenses and costs incurred by any of them. 4.4. Consultant’s Obligations Not Limited or Modified. Consultant’s obligations under this Section 4 shall not be limited to insurance proceeds, if any, received by the Indemnified Parties, or by any prior or subsequent declaration by the Consultant. Furthermore, Consultant’s obligations under this Section 4shall in no way limit, modify or excuse any of Consultant’s other obligations or duties under this Agreement. 4.5. Enforcement Costs. Consultant agrees to pay any and all costs City incurs in enforcing Consultant’s obligations under this Section 4. 4.6 Survival. Consultant’s obligations under this Section 4 shall survive the termination of this Agreement. 5.FINANCIAL INTERESTS OF CONSULTANT. 5.1Form 700 Filing.The California Political Reform Act and the Chula Vista Conflict of Interest Code require certain government officials and consultants performing work for government agencies to publicly disclose certain of their personal assets and income using a Statement of Economic Interests form (Form 700). In order to assure compliance with these requirements, Consultant shall comply with the disclosure requirements identified in the attached Exhibit C, incorporated into the Agreement by this reference. 5.2Disclosures; Prohibited Interests.Independent of whether Consultant is required to file a Form 700, Consultant warrants and represents that it has disclosed to City any economic interests held by Consultant, or its employees or subcontractors who will be performing the Required Services, in any real property or project which is the subject of this Agreement. Consultant warrants and represents that it has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee or approved subcontractor working solely for Consultant, to solicit or secure this Agreement. Further, Consultant warrants and represents that it has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee or approved subcontractor working solely for Consultant, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Agreement. Consultant further warrants and represents that no officer or employee of City, has any interest, whether contractual, non- contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction, the proceeds hereof, or in the business of Consultant or Consultant’s subcontractors. Consultant further agrees to notify City in the event any such interest is discovered whether or not such interest is prohibited by law or this Agreement. For breach or violation of any of these warranties, City shall have the right to rescind this Agreement without liability. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 251 7 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 160971 Consultant Name: Moore Iacofano Goltsman (MIG), Inc.Rev. 8/23/16 6.REMEDIES 6.1Termination for Cause. If for any reason whatsoever Consultant shall fail to perform the Required Services under this Agreement, in a proper or timely manner, or if Consultant shall violate any of the other covenants, agreements or conditions of this Agreement (each a “Default”), in addition to any and all other rights and remedies City may have under this Agreement, at law or in equity, City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving five (5) days written notice to Consultant. Such notice shall identify the Default and the Agreement termination date. If Consultant notifies City of its intent to cure such Default prior to City’s specified termination date, and City agrees that the specified Default is capable of being cured, City may grant Consultant up to ten(10) additional days after the designated termination date to effectuate such cure. In the event of a termination under this Section 6.1, Consultant shall immediately provide City any and all ”Work Product” (defined in Section 7below) prepared by Consultant as part of the Required Services. Such Work Product shall be City’s sole and exclusive property as provided in Section 7 hereof. Consultant may be entitled to compensation for work satisfactorily performed prior to Consultant’s receipt of the Defaultnotice; provided, however, in no event shall such compensation exceed the amount that would have been payable under this Agreement for such work, and any such compensation shall be reduced by any costs incurred or projected to be incurred by City as a result of the Default. 6.2 Termination or Suspension for Convenience of City. City may suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion of the Required Services, at any time and for any reason, with or without cause, by giving specific written notice toConsultant of such termination or suspensionat least fifteen (15) days prior to the effective date thereof. Upon receipt of such notice, Consultant shall immediately cease all work under the Agreement and promptly deliver all “Work Product” (defined in Section 7below) to City. Such Work Product shall be City's sole and exclusive property as provided in Section 7 hereof. Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for this Work Product in an amount equal to the amount due and payable under this Agreement for work satisfactorily performed as of the date of the termination/suspension notice plus any additional remaining Required Services requested or approved by City in advance that would maximize City’s value under the Agreement. 6.3 Waiver of Claims. In the event City terminates the Agreement in accordance with the terms of this Section, Consultant hereby expressly waives any and all claims for damages or compensation as a result of such termination except as expresslyprovided in this Section 6. 6.4Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures. No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this Agreement against City unless a claim has first been presented in writing and filed with City and acted upon by City in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, as same may be amended, the provisions of which, including such policies and procedures used by City in the implementation of same, are incorporated herein by this reference. Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in good faith with City for the purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement. 6.5Governing Law/Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be broughtonly in San Diego County, State of California. 6.6 Service of Process.Consultant agrees that it is subject to personal jurisdiction in California. If Consultant is a foreign corporation, limited liability company, or partnership that is not registered with the California Secretary of State, Consultant irrevocably consents to service of process on Consultant by first 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 252 8 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 160971 Consultant Name: Moore Iacofano Goltsman (MIG), Inc.Rev. 8/23/16 class mail directed to the individual and address listed under “For Legal Notice,” in section 1.B. of Exhibit A to this Agreement, and that such service shall be effective five days after mailing. 7.OWNERSHIP AND USE OF WORK PRODUCT All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures, systems and any other materials or properties produced in whole or in part under this Agreement in connection with the performance of the Required Services (collectively “Work Product”) shall be the sole and exclusive property of City. No such Work Product shall be subject to private use, copyrights or patent rights by Consultant in the United States or in any other country without the express, prior written consent of City. City shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose, distribute, and otherwise use, copyright or patent, in whole or in part, any such Work Product, without requiring any permission of Consultant, except as may be limited by the provisions of the Public Records Act or expressly prohibited by other applicable laws. With respect to computer files containing data generated as Work Product, Consultant shall make available to City, upon reasonable written request by City,the necessary functional computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring and printing computer files. 8. GENERAL PROVISIONS 8.1Amendment. This Agreement may be amended, but only in writing signed by both Parties. 8.2 Assignment. City would not have entered into this Agreement but for Consultant’s unique qualifications and traits. Consultant shall not assign any of its rights or responsibilities under this Agreement, nor any part hereof, without City’s prior written consent, which City may grant, condition or deny in its sole discretion. 8.3Authority. The person(s) executing this Agreement for Consultant warrants and represents that they have the authority to execute same on behalf of Consultant and to bind Consultant to its obligations hereunder without any further action or direction from Consultant or any board, principle or officer thereof. 8.4Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which shall constitute one Agreement after each Party has signed such a counterpart. 8.5Entire Agreement. This Agreement together with all exhibits attached hereto and other agreements expressly referred to herein, constitutes the entire Agreementbetween the Parties with respect to the subject matter contained herein. All exhibits referenced herein shall be attached hereto and are incorporated herein by reference. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations, warranties and statements, oral or written, are superseded. 8.6 Record Retention. During the course of the Agreement and for three (3) years following completion of the Required Services,Consultant agrees to maintain, intact and readily accessible, all data, documents, reports, records, contracts, and supporting materials relating to the performance of the Agreement, including accounting for costs and expenses charged to City, including such records in the possession of sub- contractors/sub-consultants. 8.7Further Assurances. The Parties agree to perform such further acts and to execute and deliver such additional documents and instruments as may be reasonably required in order to carry out the provisions of this Agreement and the intentions of the Parties. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 253 9 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 160971 Consultant Name: Moore Iacofano Goltsman (MIG), Inc.Rev. 8/23/16 8.8Independent Contractor. Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to City a wholly independent contractor. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees, agents or volunteers shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant’s officers, employees, or agents (“Consultant Related Individuals”), except as set forth in this Agreement. No Consultant Related Individuals shall be deemed employees of City, and none of them shall be entitled to any benefits to which City employees are entitled, including but not limited to, overtime, retirement benefits, worker's compensation benefits, injury leave or other leave benefits. Furthermore, City will not withhold state or federal income tax, social security tax or any other payroll tax with respect to any Consultant Related Individuals; instead, Consultant shall be solely responsible for the payment of same and shall hold the City harmless with respect to same. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its Consultant Related Individuals are employees or agents of City. Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatsoever against City, or bind City in any manner. 8.9Notices. All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to this Agreement must be in writing. All notices, demands and requests to be sent to any Party shall be deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served or deposited in the United States mail, addressed to such Party, postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt requested, at the addresses identified in this Agreement atthe places of business for each of the designated Partiesas indicatedin Exhibit A, or otherwise provided in writing. (End of page. Next page is signature page.) 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 254 10 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 160971 Consultant Name: Moore Iacofano Goltsman (MIG), Inc.Rev. 8/23/16 SIGNATURE PAGE CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT IN WITNESS WHEREOF, by executing this Agreement where indicated below, City and Consultant agree that they have read and understood all terms and conditions of the Agreement, that they fully agree and consent to bound by same, and that they are freely entering into this Agreement as of the Effective Date. MOORE IACOFANO GOLTSMAN (MIG), INC. CITY OF CHULA VISTA BY:________________________________BY: ________________________________ CAROLYN M. VERHEYEN GARY HALBERT COO, SECRETARY CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: ________________________________ GLEN R. GOOGINS CITY ATTORNEY 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 255 11 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 160971 Consultant Name: Moore Iacofano Goltsman (MIG), Inc.Rev. 8/23/16 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF WORK AND PAYMENT TERMS 1.Contact People for Contract Administration and Legal Notice A.City Contract Administration: Patricia Ferman 276 Fourth Avenue, Building B Chula Vista, CA 91910 pferman@chulavistaca.gov For Legal Notice Copy to: City of Chula Vista City Attorney 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910 619-691-5037 CityAttorney@ci.chula-vista.ca.us B.ConsultantContract Administration: MOORE IACOFANO GOLTSMAN (MIG), INC. RICK BARRETT 1111 Sixth Avenue, Suite 404 San Diego, CA 92101 (619) 677-2003rickb@migcom.com For Legal Notice Copy to: Adele Torreano 800 Hearst Avenue Berkeley, CA 94710 (510) 845-7549 atorreano@migcom.com 2.Required Services A.General Description: Consultant will provide urban design services for the preparation of the F Street Promenade Streetscape Master Plan and 30% construction drawings. B.Detailed Description: Task 1.Project Initiation Consultant shall perform the following: a.Attend a kickoff meeting with City Staff This meeting is for the Consultant to get familiar with the project. Staff will provide the Consultant with any information it has gathered to date on the Project. The primary purpose of the meeting will be to: i. Make introductions between key Staff and MIG team members. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 256 12 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 160971 Consultant Name: Moore Iacofano Goltsman (MIG), Inc.Rev. 8/23/16 ii. Set the vision, goals, and objectives. iii. Identify additional data required to complete the Project. iv. Identify and discuss preliminary opportunity and constraints. v. Set schedule and dates. vii. Verify roles of responsibilities between the City of Chula Vista and MIG. b.Conduct Site Reconnaissance -Consultant will tour the project area with City staff to become familiar with existing uses, site opportunities and constraints, linkages, and community character. c.Prepare Agenda and Meeting Minutes d.Prepare Project Schedule e.Consultant shall provide the following deliverablesto City i.Meeting agenda and minutes ii.Project Schedule Task 2. Site Analysis Consultant shall perform the following: a.Collect existing conditions data i.Collect and analyze existing infrastructure, utility conflicts/relocation and existing conditions. ii.Collect bicycle, pedestrians and vehicular counts (6 hours am/mid/pm) iii.Analyze parking, circulation patterns, capacity, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, landscaping improvements, overhead utilities, and street right‐of‐way and cross sections. iv.Determine site capacities and collect land use/ real estate information. Identify other opportunities and constraints. v.Take site photographs of existing conditions. b.Base Map Preparation i.Prepare an engineering base map suitable for construction documents utilizing information and data from Task 2.a.including: 1)40 scale aerial topo with 1-foot contour interval for a 300-foot-wide strip centered on centerline 2)Establish street centerline and right-of-way limits based on field survey and record drafting, including side streets for 300’ from centerline 3)Draft existing utilities based on available information, including GISand record drawings. 4)Identify site opportunities and constraints graphically on base map. c.Community Workshop #1–Workshop agenda shall include the following: i.Provide an overview of the goals, purpose and timeline for the F Street Promenade Streetscape Master Plan. ii.Engage the public in designing various elements and soliciting their input. The format for the workshop shall be as follows: 1)Opening presentation to introduce the Design Team (Consultant and City team), and the project, including existing/proposed elements. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 257 13 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 160971 Consultant Name: Moore Iacofano Goltsman (MIG), Inc.Rev. 8/23/16 2)Design workshop and charrette with the Community. 3)Project’s findings in summary form presented to the Community for feedback. d.Meet with City teambefore Workshop#1to: i.Prepare for Community Workshop#1 i.Discuss Workshop #1 format, location, logistics and workshop flyer e.Meet with City team after Workshop #1 to: i.Share findings of Workshop #1 f.Consultant shall provide the following deliverables to City: i.Meeting agendas and minutes ii.Existing Conditions and Site Analysis Findings summarizing Task 2.a.(15-20 pages). iii.Base Map in AutoCad Civil 3D and PDF format iv.Opportunities and Constraints Map v.Workshop PowerPoint, flyer design, handouts and materials vi.Workshop Summary Notes Task 3. ConceptualDesign (Develop Three Conceptual Design Alternatives and Preferred Design) Consultant shall perform the following: a.Develop Streetscape Concepts and Three Conceptual Design Alternatives i.Based on the information gathered as part of the Site Analysis and input from Community Workshop #1, this task synthesizes the preliminary planning, technical, and construction data to develop three (3) conceptual design alternatives. ii.Incorporate the complete street design elements described under the Project Description, and provide preliminary design plans, concept sketches, visual simulations, graphics, and a photo essay taken during multiple site visits. iii.Work closely with Staff to review and refine the conceptual designs and alternatives/solutions into a vision to establish a street themeand identity that reflects the input gained at Workshop #1 and resolves conflicting issues. iv.Develop three design alternativeswhichshall include, but not be limited to: 1)Program development of site features and components, giving consideration to accentuating visual points of interest, preserving the historic character of unique areas, linking multiple pedestrian areas, residential neighborhoods and business, identifying focal points, integrating various land uses, and accommodatingmodes of transportation. Attention shall be given to creating a complete street, and to develop a visual theme for the project area that unifies the different land uses. 2)Plan view, cross-sections, perspectives, illustrations, and narrative necessary to convey design alternatives. Consultant shalldevelop up to four street sections and three street view hand drawn sketches. 3)Provide eight (8) color hard copies and a .PDF of the design alternatives to City Team for review and feedback (size 11x17 or as agreed to illustrate the concepts and convey the design). b.Bicycle Advisory CommitteePresentation 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 258 14 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 160971 Consultant Name: Moore Iacofano Goltsman (MIG), Inc.Rev. 8/23/16 Consultant shall: i.Meet with City Team to discuss the design alternatives prior to presenting to the Bicycle Advisory Committee. ii.Provide a preliminary review of conceptual designs developed to the Bicycle Advisory Committee and solicit their feedback. iii.Meet with City Team to discuss the design alternatives following the Bicycle Advisory Committee and prepare for Community Workshop #2. c.Community Workshop #2 i.Consultant shalllead an outdoor workshop to be conducted within the study area.Possible locations include: Library,City Hall Parking Lot, F Street between Landis and Third Avenue, orcloser to the Bayfront. Workshop could be scheduled to coincide with other planned events such as a farmer’s market or could be on a Saturday morning. ii.Consultant shall provide materials for workshop, including: 1)Depiction of three (3) alternatives in plan view, mounted on boards 2)Precedent imagery and image preference survey foreach alternative 3)Comment cards and flip charts for gathering public input iii.Consultant shallwork with City Staff to identify location of possible improvements such as bulb-outs, parklets, crosswalks and bike lanes. iv.Consultant shallprepare one (1) preliminary and one (1) final bubble diagram depicting pop- up workshop layout. v.Consultant shall work with Cityto identify and secure materials to depict possible improvements such as: 1)Artificial turf 2)Potted plants 3)Moveable furniture 4)Roadway tape for bike lanes vi.Project Team to finalize location of workshop by November 10, 2016. d.Consultant shall develop Preferred Designand perform the following: i.Based on the information gathered as part of the Site Analysis, the meeting with the Bicycle Advisory Committeeand input from the first two Community Workshops, the Consultant shallrefine the Conceptual Design Alternatives to create the Preferred Design. ii.Incorporate the complete street design elements described under the Project Objectivesof the Request for Proposals, and provide further refinements to the design plans and concept sketches. iii.Provide eight (8) color hard copies and a .PDF of the Preferred Design to City Team for review and feedback. e.Consultant shall meet with City Team(3 meetings)toreview the Preferred Design. f.Consultant shall provide the following deliverables to City: 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 259 15 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 160971 Consultant Name: Moore Iacofano Goltsman (MIG), Inc.Rev. 8/23/16 i.Three Conceptual design alternatives ii.Workshop #2 Display Boards (as determined by City and Consultant), flyer design, handouts and materials iii.Workshop #2 Summary Notes iv.Preferred design v.Meeting agendas and minutes Task 4.Streetscape Master Plan (Develop Draft Streetscape Master Plan, Draft Final Streetscape Master Plan and Final Streetscape Master Plan) Consultant shall perform the following: a.Develop Draft Streetscape Master Plan and Narrative i.Based on the findings from Task 3, a Draft Streetscape Master Plan shallbe developed. ii.The Draft Streetscape Master Plan shallbe a design level plan that reflects the preferences identified through the community outreach effort. iii.Narrative components of the Plan shallbe drafted, and shalldescribe the design and theme elements such as street furnishings, wayfinding, and finish materials (stone, block etc.). iv.Provide eight (8) color hard copies and a PDF of the Draft Streetscape Master Plan to City Team for review and feedback. v.Develop preliminary cost estimate based on the Draft Streetscape Master Plan. b.Develop Signage and Placemaking Preliminary Design Package. Consultant design team shalladdress the following elements during a 2-week preliminary design phaseand shall perform the following: i.Hold meeting with project team to review the Concept Plan vision, goals, and objectives, and conduct project team site visit of F Street Promenade. ii.Review preliminary way-finding opportunities and constraints from Tasks 1, 2, and 3. iii.Based on team meeting and site visit (subtasks b.i. and b.ii. above) develop preliminary sign types diagram of communication elements that should be added, replaced or consolidated. iv.Submit findings to City team for feedback. v.Based on the City team feedback of the preliminary sign types diagram, develop preliminary conceptual design options/sketches of signage and wayfinding elements for the Promenade. Consultant shallshare preliminary in-progress design concepts for confirmation of design direction. vi.Develop preliminary sign location plan. vii.Present preliminary sign location plan and conceptual design options (Signage & Wayfinding) to City and project team for feedback and comments. viii.Updates to Signage and Placemaking Elements concept design to be refined and completed following the Masterplan/30% Construction Document Phase and are not included in this scope. c.Consultant shall meet(4meetings) with City Team to review the Draft Streetscape Master Plan and the preliminary Signage and Placemaking Elements package and prepare for Community Workshop #3. d.Community Workshop #3 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 260 16 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 160971 Consultant Name: Moore Iacofano Goltsman (MIG), Inc.Rev. 8/23/16 i.The Consultant and Staff shallpresent the Draft Streetscape Master Plan that has been developed based on the input from the Conceptual Design phase (Task 3). ii.Additional input shallbe sought from the various stakeholder groups and adjacent neighborhood residents, property owners, and businesses attending the workshops. iii.Prepare Draft Final Streetscape Master Plan based on input received from Workshop #3 and City. e.Safety Commission Presentation (tentatively scheduled for May 3, 2017 at 6 pm) i.Staff and the Consultant shallpresent the Draft Final Streetscape Master Plan as an advisory item to the City’s Safety Commission for a recommendation to the City Council. ii.Refine the Draft Final Streetscape Master Plan based on input from the Safety Commission, as necessary. iii.Prepare Final Streetscape Master Plan and Narrative iv.Complete the Final Streetscape Master Planthat addresses the comments received from Workshop #3 and the Safety Commission advisory meeting. v.The Design Narrative shall include a summary of the site analysis, the public outreach process, and the Promenade Master Plan narrative, photos and exhibitsat 11 x 17. f.Cost estimates (2) g.Draft Final Streetscape Master Plan h.Preparation for City Council i.Consultant shall assist Staff in preparation for City Council’s consideration for approval of the Final DraftStreetscape Master Plan. ii.This task will also include making the final draft plan available to the public electronically (post on City’s website) as was well as the production of twelve (12) hard copies and CDs. i.Consultant shall provide the following deliverables to City: i.Draft Streetscape Master Plan (including preliminary Signage and Placemaking Elements package) (11x17) ii.Preliminary signage and placemaking elements package which shall include: 1)Sign types diagram 2)Preliminary concept sketches for sign types 3)Preliminary location plan iii.Draft Streetscape Master Plan Cost Estimate iv.Workshop #3 PowerPoint, flyer design, handouts and materials v.Workshop #3 Summary Notes vi.Draft Final Streetscape Master Plan (8 hard copies, 11x17 and PDF) vii.Safety Commission Report graphics and PowerPoint assistance to Staff viii.Optional Workshop #4 if needed. ix.Final Streetscape Master Plan Cost Estimate x.Assistance to Staff for preparation of City Council Report and Resolution xi.Final Streetscape Master Plan (12 color copies, bound, 11x17 and in digital form). xii.Meeting agendas and minutes. Task 5. ConstructionDrawings (CD’s) 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 261 17 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 160971 Consultant Name: Moore Iacofano Goltsman (MIG), Inc.Rev. 8/23/16 Consultantshall prepare a 30% Construction Drawings for the F Street Promenade from Third Avenue to Bay Boulevard. The content and format of the preliminary construction drawings shall utilize he Chula Vista Landscape Manual and Chula Vista Standard Drawings as a guide for the preparation of the 30% Construction Drawings. a.30% Construction Drawings (CD’s) i.Improvement Plans and Notes. The Consultant design team shallprepare preliminary Improvement Plans consisting of proposed grading, curb, gutter and sidewalks locations and finishes ii.Planting Plans and Notes. The Consultant DesignTeam shallprepare preliminary planting plans with plant legend and general planting notes. Plans shall include identification of the proposed type, size and quantity of plant material. iii.Striping Plans and Notes. The Consultant Design Team shallpreparepreliminary striping plans for proposed vehicular and bicycle lane configurations. b.Drainage/Storm Water Quality Report. i.The Consultant DesignTeam shallprepare one preliminary Drainage and Storm Water Quality Report based on the 30% Construction Drawing package. c.Estimate of Probable Cost. i.Consultant shallprepare a preliminary Estimate of Probable Cost based on the 30% Construction Drawing package. ii.Consultant shallmeet with the City of Chula Vista during development of the 30% Construction Drawings (3 meetings total) to review drawings, reports and estimates. d.Consultant shall provide the following deliverables to City: i.30% Construction Drawings (Design Development) (one (1) full size set and six (6) 11 x 17, plus PDF) ii.Drainage/Storm Water Quality Report (two (2) copies) iii.Estimate of Probable Cost(six (6) hard copies, plus PDF. iv.Meeting agendas and minutes. C.Date for completion of all Required Services:October 31, 2017. 3. Compensation: A.Form of Compensation ⾙ Fixed Fee PaidinIncrements. For thecompletion of each Taskand associated deliverables,as identified in section 2.B.Detailed Description, the Consultant shall be paid a fixed fee based on the percent completion of the Taskon a monthly basis; percent completion shallbe determined by the City’s Contract Administrator. Consultant shall provide a detailed description of work complete with each invoice justifying the percentage complete. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 262 18 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 160971 Consultant Name: Moore Iacofano Goltsman (MIG), Inc.Rev. 8/23/16 Tasks*Compensation Completion Date 1.Project Initiation $3,425October 2016 2.Site Analysis $43,360December 2016 3.Conceptual Design $30,995March 2017 4.Streetscape Master Plan$46,945June 2017 5.Construction Drawings 30%$99,955October 2017 B.Reimbursement of Costs ⾙ None, the compensation includes all costs AND Notwithstanding the foregoing, the maximum amount to be paid to the Consultant for services performed through October 31, 2017shall not exceed $224,680. 4.Special Provisions: ⾙ Permitted Sub-consultants: Chen Ryan Associates(Transportation Engineering) Fuscoe Engineering (Civil Engineering) Selbert Perkins Design Collaborative(Signage and Wayfinding) ⾙ Options to Extend: Notwithstanding the completion date set forth in section 2.C., above, City has the option to extend this Agreement to a date no later than March 31, 2018for the purpose of conducting one additional Community Workshop. The Director of Finance/Treasurer shall be authorized to exercise the extensions on behalf of the City. If the City exercises itsoption to extend, theextension shall be on the same terms and conditions contained herein, provided that the amounts specified in Section 3above, may be increased by up to $1,500for each extension. The City shall give written notice to Consultant of the City’s election to exercise the extension. Such notice shall be provided at least 30 days prior to the expiration of the term. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 263 19 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 160971 Consultant Name: Moore Iacofano Goltsman (MIG), Inc.Rev. 8/23/16 EXHIBIT B INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS Consultant shall adhere to all terms and conditions of Section 3 of the Agreement and agrees to provide the following types and minimum amounts of insurance, as indicated by checking the applicable boxes (x). Type of InsuranceMinimum Amount Form ⾙ General Liability: Including products and completed operations, personal and advertising injury $2,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury (including death), and property damage. If Commercial General Liability insurance with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit must apply separately to this Agreement or the general aggregate limit must be twice the required occurrence limit Additional Insured Endorsement or Blanket AI Endorsement for City* Waiver of Recovery Endorsement Insurance Services Office Form CG 00 01 *Must be primary and must not exclude Products/Completed Operations ⾙ Automobile Liability$1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury, including death, and property damage Insurance Services Office Form CA 00 01 Code 1-Any Auto Code 8-Hired Code 9-Non Owned ⾙ Workers’ Compensation Employer’s Liability $1,000,000 each accident $1,000,000 disease policy limit $1,000,000 disease each employee Waiver of Recovery Endorsement ⾙ Professional Liability (Errors & Omissions) $1,000,000 each occurrence $2,000,000 aggregate Other Negotiated Insurance Terms: NONE 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 264 20 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 160971 Consultant Name: Moore Iacofano Goltsman (MIG), Inc.Rev. 8/23/16 EXHIBIT C CONSULTANT CONFLICT OF INTEREST DESIGNATION The Political Reform Act1 and the Chula Vista Conflict of Interest Code2 (“Code”) require designated state and local government officials, including some consultants, to make certain public disclosures using a Statement of Economic Interests form (Form 700).Once filed, a Form 700 is a public document, accessible to any memberof the public. In addition, consultants designated to file the Form 700 are also required to comply with certain ethics training requirements.3 1.Required Filers Each individual who will be performing services for the City pursuant to the Agreement and whomeets the definition of “Consultant,” pursuant to FPPC Regulation 18700.3, must file a Form 700. 2.Required Filing Deadlines Each initial Form 700 required under this Agreement shall be filed with the Office of the City Clerk via the City's online filing system, NetFile, within 30 days of the approval of the Agreement. Additional Form 700 filings will be required annually on April 1 during the term of the Agreement, and within 30 days of the termination of the Agreement. 3. Filing Designation The City Department Director will designate each individual who will be providing services to the City pursuant to the Agreement as full disclosure, limited disclosure, or excluded from disclosure, based on an analysis of the services the Consultant will provide. Notwithstanding this designation or anything in the Agreement, the Consultant is ultimately responsible for complying with FPPC regulations and filing requirements. If you have any questions regarding filing requirements, please do not hesitate tocontact the City Clerk at (619)691-5041, or the FPPC at 1-866-ASK-FPPC, or (866) 275-3772 *2. APPLICABLE DESIGNATIONS FOR INDIVIDUAL(S) ASSIGNED TO PROVIDE SERVICES (Category descriptionsavailable at www.chulavistaca.gov/departments/city-clerk/conflict-of-interest-code.) Name Email Address Applicable Designation Moore Iacofano Goltsman (MIG), Inc. rickb@migcom.com ☐A. Full Disclosure ☐B. Limited Disclosure (select one or more of the above categories under which the consultant shall file): ☐1. ☐2. ☐3. ☐4. ☐5. ☐6. ☐7. Justification: ⾙ C. Excluded from Disclosure Completed by: PatriciaFerman Pursuant to the duly adopted City of Chula Vista Conflict of Interest Code, this document shall serve as the written determination of the consultant’s requirement to comply with the disclosure requirements set forth in the Code. 1Cal. Gov. Code §§81000 et seq.; FPPC Regs. 18700.3 and 18704. 2Chula Vista Municipal Code §§2.02.010-2.02.040. 3Cal. Gov. Code §§53234, et seq. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 265 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUI�'CIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVII�'G A T�l'O-PARTY AGREEMENT BETVJEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AI�'D MOORE IACOFA\t0 ATiD GOLTSMAN (MIG), II�'C., FOR DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE F STREET PROMEI�'ADE STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAI�' AI�TD .i0% DESIGI�' DEVELOPMENT CONSTRUCTION DOCUME\'TS V1'HEREAS, City �i�as a�varded funding through the San Diego Association of Governments (SAt`TDAG) TransAret Active Transportation Grant Program (ATGP) for the preparation of the F Street Promenade SVeetscape Master Plan (Project) and subsequentl�� entered into an Aereement with SAI�TDAG in Ausust 201�: and WHEREAS. Cit�� requires urban desi�n services for the preparation of the Project, located on F Street from Third Avenue to Ba�� Boule��ard: and N'HEREAS, In order to procure these services City solicited proposals in accordance with Chula Vista Municipal Code Sections 2.56.080 for contracts esceeding �100,000: and 2.56.110 for proFessional services, received three proposals, and selected MIG. Inc. (Consultant) as the most qualified amongst those submitting, and WHEREAS, Consultant warrants and represents that it is experienced and staffed in a manner such that it can deliver the services required of Consultant to City in accordance ��ith the time frames and the terms and conditions of this Aereement. WHEREAS, the design of the Master Plan and 30% Desien Development Construction Documents will be manaeed and appro��ed by the City in accordance with the objectives ' contained within the Urban Core Specific Plan, as ��ell as, the Citys Street Design and Construction Standards: and NOW. THEREFORE. BE IT RESOL\'ED bv the Cih� Council of the Cin- of Chula Vista. that it hereb�� approves the Two-Party Agreement bet�;�een the City and MIG Inc. for desien sen�ices F Street Promenade I�4aster Plan and 30% construction documents in the form presented; �vith such minor modifications as may be required or approved by the Cin� Attomey, a cop�� of��hich shall be kept on file in the Office of the Cin� Clerk and authorizes and directs the Mavor to execute same. Presented b�� Approved as to form b}� Kelh� Brouehton; Glen R. Gooeins Director of De��elopment Sen�ices Cih� Attome�� City of Chula Vista Staff Report File#:16-0379, Item#: 7. RESOLUTIONOFTHECITYCOUNCILOFTHECITYOFCHULAVISTAAPPROVINGALETTER OFUNDERSTANDING(INVOLVINGUNIFORMSANDREPORTABLECOMPENSATION,AS DEFINEDBYCALPERS)WITHSEIULOCAL221/CHULAVISTAEMPLOYEESASSOCIATION,AS REQUIREDBYTHECALIFORNIAPUBLICEMPLOYEES'RETIREMENTSYSTEMOFFICEOF AUDITSERVICESANDCALIFORNIACODEOFREGULATIONS,TITLE2,SECTION571(b)(1)(A) (B) RECOMMENDED ACTION Council adopt the resolution. SUMMARY In2013,theCaliforniaPublicEmployees'RetirementSystem(CalPERS)OfficeofAuditServices (OAS)conductedapublicagencyreviewoftheCityofChulaVistatoexamineCitycompliancewith applicablesectionsoftheCaliforniaGovernmentCode,CaliforniaCodeofRegulations,andtheCity contract with CalPERS. AsaresultofOAS'reviewandinordertocomplywithCaliforniaCodeofRegulations(CCR),Title2, Section571(b)(1)(A)(B)whichrequiresthatreportablecompensation,asdefinedbyCalPERS,be containedinawrittenlaborpolicyoragreementthatisapprovedandadoptedbytheemployer's governingbody,StaffissubmittingaLetterofUnderstanding(regardinguniformsandreportable compensation,asdefinedbyCalPERS)betweentheCityandSEIULocal221/ChulaVista Employees Association (SEIU 221/CVEA) for adoption by the City Council. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Environmental Notice Theactivityisnota“Project”asdefinedunderSection15378oftheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQuality ActStateGuidelines;therefore,pursuanttoStateGuidelinesSection15060(c)(3)noenvironmental review is required. Environmental Determination TheDirectorofDevelopmentServiceshasreviewedtheproposedactivityforcompliancewiththe CaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct(CEQA)andhasdeterminedthattheactivityisnota“Project”as definedunderSection15378oftheStateCEQAGuidelinesbecauseitwillnotresultinaphysical changeintheenvironment;therefore,pursuanttoSection15060(c)(3)oftheStateCEQAGuidelines, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is required. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Not Applicable City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 267 File#:16-0379, Item#: 7. DISCUSSION In2013,theCaliforniaPublicEmployees'RetirementSystem(CalPERS)OfficeofAuditServices (OAS)conductedapublicagencyreviewoftheCityofChulaVistatoexamineCitycompliancewith applicablesectionsoftheCaliforniaGovernmentCode,CaliforniaCodeofRegulations,andtheCity contractwithCalPERS.Aspartoftheirreview,OASfoundthattheCityneededtoamendcurrent MemorandumsofUnderstandingbyadoptingspecificlanguageandprocessesasitrelatesto employee uniform allowances. Furthermore,CaliforniaCodeofRegulations(CCR),Title2,Section571(b)(1)(A)(B)requiresthat reportablecompensation,asdefinedbyCalPERS,becontainedinawrittenlaborpolicyor agreementandsuchpolicyoragreementbedulyapprovedandadoptedbytheemployer'sgoverning body in accordance with the requirements of applicable public meetings laws. TheCityrespondedbymeetingwithallimpactedlaborgroupsandreachedagreementonLettersof UnderstandingtoaddressOAS'findingandLettersofUnderstandingweresubsequentlyapprovedby the City Council at their June 7, 2016 meeting. CalPERSlaternotifiedstaffthattheLetterofUnderstandingbetweentheCityandSEIU221/CVEA, whileaddressedtheconditionsofpaymentforcleaningandmaintenanceofuniforms,didnotinclude anupperlimitreimbursement.StaffhassincereachedagreementwithSEIU221/CVEAonasecond Letter of Understanding that addresses CalPERS' additional requirement. ThisactionmeetsthedirectionfromCalPERStohaveCityCouncilapprovesaidLetterof Understanding, to meet the requirements of the CCR, Title 2, Section 571(b) (1) (A) (B). DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT Staffhasdeterminedthattheactioncontemplatedbythisitemisministerial,secretarial,manual,or clericalinnatureand,assuch,doesnotrequiretheCityCouncilmemberstomakeorparticipatein makingagovernmentaldecision,pursuanttoCaliforniaCodeofRegulationsTitle2,section18702.4 (a).Consequently,thisitemdoesnotpresentaconflictunderthePoliticalReformAct(Cal.Gov't Code§87100,etseq.).Staffisnotindependentlyaware,andhasnotbeeninformedbyanyCity Councilmember,ofanyotherfactthatmayconstituteabasisforadecisionmakerconflictofinterest in this matter. LINK TO STRATEGIC GOALS TheCity’sStrategicPlanhasfivemajorgoals:OperationalExcellence,EconomicVitality,Healthy Community,StrongandSecureNeighborhoodsandaConnectedCommunity.ApprovalofthisLetter ofUnderstandingsupportstheCity-widestrategicgoalofOperationalExcellenceasitenhances disclosureandtransparencyofemployeecompensationand,asaresult,fosterspublictrustthrough an open and ethical government. CURRENT YEAR FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT Not applicable. City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 268 File#:16-0379, Item#: 7. ATTACHMENTS LetterofUnderstandingbetweentheCityofChulaVistaandSEIULocal221/ChulaVistaEmployees Association - Uniforms Staff Contact: Erin Dempster City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 269 LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND SEIU LOCAL 221/CHULA VISTA EMPLOYEES ASSOCATION UNIFORMS This attests to and records the agreement of the City of Chula Vista and SEIU Local 221/Chula Vista Employees Association regarding Article 2.16 (Uniforms) of the current Memorandum of Understanding. In order to comply with the Public Employees' Retirement Law (PERL) the City must report the value of the actual uniform and an employee's uniform cleaning and maintenance allowance as earned (biweekly). As such, the City and SEIU Local 221/CVEA agree to update Article 2.16 to read as follows: ARTICLE 2.16 UNIFORMS The classifications listed in Appendix B will wear uniforms supplied and maintained by the City. Five uniform changes will be made available to each employee each week. Employees will be held responsible for the loss or misplacement of said uniforms. In the event of uniform loss, the employee will be required to reimburse the City for the uniform's replacement unless employee can show non-negligence on employee's part. II.The City will reimburse employees in the classifications listed in Appendix C for uniforms and will provide a uniform cleaning allowance of $6.73 bi-weekly when authorized by their Appointing Authority. The allowance will be paid to employees who have spent more than 50% of their working hours in uniform during the fiscal year. The City will provide uniform shorts to employees in classifications listed in Appendix B and will reimburse employees in classifications listed in Appendix C for the purchase of uniform shorts when approved by the Appointing Authority and the Risk Manager. The Cit ort to CaIPERS the actuat monetary value for the items issued above for CVEA covered CalPERS' Classic Members. The value shall not exceed er fiscal year. FOR THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA: Erin Dempster Human Resources Operations Manager FOR SU L al 2j21/CVF:: , Michael Sherritt Worksite Organizer 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 270 RESOLUTION NO. __________ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING(INVOLVING UNIFORM ALLOWANCES AND REPORTABLE COMPENSATION, AS DEFINED BY CALPERS) WITH SEIU LOCAL 221/CHULA VISTA EMPLOYEES ASSOCATION, AS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OFFICE OF AUDIT SERVICES AND CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, TITLE 2, SECTION 571(b) (1) (A) (B) WHEREAS, the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) Office of Audit Services (OAS) conducted a public agency review of the City of Chula Vista to examine City compliance with applicable sections of the California Government Code, California Code of Regulations,and the City contract with CalPERS; and WHEREAS, as part of their review, OAS found that amendments to current Memorandumsof Understanding were necessary to bring language into compliance and meetthe requirements of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 2, Section 571(b)(1)(A)(B); and WHEREAS, following the CalPERS audit, City Staff met with impacted bargaining units to agree to Letters of Understanding (LOU’s) that would amend currently adopted Memorandums ofUnderstanding;and WHEREAS, on June 7, 2016 after meeting with the bargaining units, City Council approved the required LOU’s; and WHEREAS, thereafter,CalPERS required as an additional term to the LOU’sthat an upper limit forthe uniform allowance compensation be included; and WHEREAS, in compliance with CalPERS requirements, City Staff is submitting a LOU between the City and SEIU Local 221/CVEA,adding an upper limit to the uniform allowance compensation,for City Council approval and adoption pursuant to CCR, Title 2, Section 571(b) (1)(A)(B), a copyof said LOUison file in the City Clerk’s Office. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, that it hereby does approve and adopt, as required by California Code of Regulations Title 2, Section 571(b) (1) (A) (B), the above referenced LOUand further authorizes the City Manager to make such minor modifications to the LOU as may be required or approved by the City Attorney’s Office. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 271 Presented by Approved as to form by Courtney Chase Glen R. Googins Director of Human Resources City Attorney 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 272 City of Chula Vista Staff Report File#:16-0416, Item#: 8. ..Title RESOLUTIONOFTHECITYCOUNCILOFTHECITYOFCHULAVISTACOMMITTINGTO PROVIDINGMATCHINGFUNDSINTHEAMOUNTOF$220,000FROMTHEBIKELANESON BROADWAYFEASIBILITYSTUDYPROJECT(STM384)TOTHEATPGRANT“CLASS2BIKE LANESONBROADWAYPROJECTNO.11-CHULAVISTA-1”;ACCEPTINGTHETERMSOFTHE GRANTAGREEMENTIFAWARDED;ANDAUTHORIZINGTHEDIRECTOROFPUBLICWORKS ORHISDESIGNEETOACCEPTTHEATPCYCLE3GRANTFUNDINGANDEXECUTEALL GRANTDOCUMENTSANDREQUESTSFORPAYMENTSNECESSARYTOSECUREGRANT FUNDS RECOMMENDED ACTION Council adopt the resolution. SUMMARY TheCityofChulaVistaappliedforthestatewide2016ActiveTransportationProgram(ATP)grant competitionandsubmittedanelectroniccopyoftheapplicationandadditionalquestionnaireto SANDAGfortheinstallationofClass2BikeLanesonBroadway.TheATPprovidesfundingtoplan, designandconstructbicycleandpedestrianinfrastructureprojects.TheRegionalATPapplication submittalrequiresthattheCityCouncilapprovecertainresolutionsconsistentwithSANDAGBoard Policy No. 035. The resolutions must be received by SANDAG prior to November 25, 2016. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Environmental Notice Thisactivityisnota“Project”asdefinedunderSection15378oftheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQuality ActStateGuidelines,therefore,pursuanttoStateGuidelinesSection15060(c)(3)noenvironmental review is required. Environmental Determination TheDirectorofDevelopmentServiceshasreviewedtheproposedactivityforcompliancewiththe CaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct(CEQA)andhasdeterminedthattheactivityisnota“Project”as definedunderSection15378oftheStateCEQAGuidelinesbecausetheproposalconsistsofan administrativefundingsolicitationwithouttheassurancethatthesefundswillbeprocuredforthe project.OncetheActiveTransportationProgram(ATP)fundingisawardedandpreliminary engineeringisprepared,anenvironmentalreviewwillbeconductedandtheappropriate determinationwillbemade.Therefore,pursuanttoSection15060(c)(3)oftheStateCEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is required. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Not Applicable City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 273 File#:16-0416, Item#: 8. DISCUSSION TheATPwascreatedbySenateBill99(Chapter359,Statuesof2013)andAssemblyBill101 (Chapter354,Statutesof2013)toencourageincreaseduseofactivemodesoftransportation,such asbikingandwalking.ATPisadministeredjointlybytheCaliforniaTransportationCommission (CTC) and Caltrans. TheRegionalATPsubmittalrequiresaresolutionfromtheapplicant’sauthorizedgoverningbodythat includes the following provisions, consistent with SANDAG Board Policy No. 035 (Attachment 1). ·Applicant’sgoverningbodycommitstoprovidingtheamountofmatchingfundssetforthinthe grant application. ·Applicant’sgoverningbodyauthorizesstafftoacceptthegrantfundingandexecuteagrant agreement, if an award is made by the CTC or SANDAG. Grant Application Citystaffsubmittedagrantapplicationfor$1,246,000ingrantfundswith$220,000inmatchingfunds toconstructClass2BikeLanesonBroadwayfromCStreettoMainStreetinChulaVista.The constructionofClass2BikeLanesincludestheremovalandreplacementofexistingtrafficsignsand striping;installationofbikeracks;constructionofbuspads;updatingtrafficsignalindicationsand detection for vehicles and bicycles; and the applying of pavement slurry seal. ThisprojectwillreplacetheexistingClass3BikeRoutefacilityonBroadwayandwillreduceor eliminatebicyclistsridingonthewrongsideoftheroadagainsttheflowofvehiculartrafficandon sidewalks,therebyreducingcollisionsinthecorridor.Theseimprovementswillprovideanorderly flowofbothmotoristsandnon-motoristsinthecorridor.ThisprojectisconsistentwiththeATPgoals, such as increasing walking and biking in the community. TheBikeLanesonBroadwayFeasibilityStudy(Attachment2)wasapprovedonFebruary16,2016, whenCounciladoptedResolutionNo.2016-023(Attachment3).ThisResolutionauthorizedthe implementationofthestudyrecommendationsasfundingallowsthroughfuturecapitalimprovement program projects. The following summarizes the recommendations of the Feasibility Study: ·CStreettoGStreet:Afive-footbikelanewithathree-footbufferoneachsideofthestreet, with a parking lane and a single travel lane in each direction ·GStreettoLStreet:Afive-footbikelaneoneachside,withtwotravellanesandon-street parking in each direction ·LStreettoMainStreet:Afive-footbikelanewithathree-footbufferoneachside,withtwo travel lanes in each direction and no on-street parking Transnetfundsintheamountof$250,000wereappropriatedaspartoftheFiscalYear2016/2017 CapitalImprovementProgram(STM384)foraninitialimplementationoftheBikeLanesonBroadway Feasibility Study. $220,000 of these funds are proposed to be used as a match. City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 274 File#:16-0416, Item#: 8. DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT StaffhasreviewedthepropertyholdingsoftheCityCouncilmembersandhasfoundnoproperty holdingswithin500feetoftheboundariesofthepropertywhichisthesubjectofthisaction. Consequently,thisitemdoesnotpresentadisqualifyingrealproperty-relatedfinancialconflictof interestunderCaliforniaCodeofRegulationsTitle2,section18702.2(a)(11),forpurposesofthe Political Reform Act (Cal. Gov’t Code §87100,et seq.). Staffisnotindependentlyaware,andhasnotbeeninformedbyanyCityCouncilmember,ofany other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision maker conflict of interest in this matter. LINK TO STRATEGIC GOALS TheCity’sStrategicPlanhasfivemajorgoals:OperationalExcellence,EconomicVitality,Healthy Community,StrongandSecureNeighborhoodsandaConnectedCommunity.TheBikeLaneson BroadwayprojectsupportstheHealthyCommunitygoal.ThisprojectisalsoconsistentwiththeATP goalsofincreasingwalkingandbikinginthecommunityandincreasingthesafetyandmobilityofnon -motorizedusers.Anincreaseinbicycleusereducesgreenhousegases,enhancespublichealth and promotes an active lifestyle. CURRENT YEAR FISCAL IMPACT TherearesufficientTransNetfundsintheBikeLanesonBroadwayFeasibilityStudyProject (STM384) for the $220,000 in matching funds required for this project. ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT ThegrantfundswillallowtheCitytoconstructthisprojectwithoutadditionalfutureexpenditures. The new striping will require routine maintenance. ATTACHMENTS 1.SANDAG Board Policy No. 035 2.Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report dated February 2016 3.Resolution No. 2016-023 Staff Contact: Mari Malong, Associate Engineer City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 275 BOARD POLICY NO. 035 COMPETITIVE GRANT PROGRAM PROCEDURES Applicability and Purpose of Policy This Policy applies to all grant programs administered through SANDAG, whether from TransNet or another source, including but not limited to the Smart Growth Incentive Program, Environmental Mitigation Program, Bike and Pedestrian Program, Senior Mini Grant Program, Federal Transit Administration grant programs, and Active Transportation Grant Program. Nothing in this Policy is intended to supersede federal or state grant rules, regulations, statutes, or contract documents that conflict with the requirements in this Policy. There are never enough government grant funds to pay for all of the projects worthy of funding in the San Diego region. For this reason, SANDAG awards grant funds on a competitive basis that takes the grantees’ ability to perform their proposed project on a timely basis into account. SANDAG intends to hold grantees accountable to the project schedules they have proposed in order to ensure fairness in the competitive process and encourage grantees to get their projects implemented quickly so that the public can benefit from the project deliverables as soon as possible. Procedures 1. Project Milestone and Completion Deadlines 1.1. When signing a grant agreement for a competitive program funded and/or administered by SANDAG, grant recipients must agree to the project delivery objectives and schedules in the agreement. In addition, a grantee’s proposal must contain a schedule that falls within the following deadlines. Failure to meet the deadlines below may result in revocation of all grant funds not already expended. The final invoice for capital, planning, or operations grants must be submitted prior to the applicable deadline. 1.1.1. Funding for Capital Projects. If the grant will fund a capital project, the project must be completed according to the schedule provided in the grant agreement, but at the latest, any necessary construction contract must be awarded within two years following execution of the grant agreement, and construction must be completed within eighteen months following award of the construction contract. Completion of construction for purposes of this policy shall be when the prime construction contractor is relieved from its maintenance responsibilities. If no construction contract award is necessary, the construction project must be complete within eighteen months following execution of the grant agreement. 1.1.2. Funding for Planning Grants. If the grant will fund planning, the project must be completed according to the schedule provided in the grant agreement, but at the latest, any necessary consultant contract must be awarded within one year following execution of the grant agreement, and the planning project must be 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 276 2 complete within two years following award of the consultant contract. Completion of planning for purposes of this policy shall be when grantee approves the final planning project deliverable. If no consultant contract award is necessary, the planning project must be complete within two years of execution of the grant agreement. 1.1.3 Funding for Operations Grants. If the grant will fund operations, the project must be completed according to the schedule provided in the grant agreement, but at the latest, any necessary services contract for operations must be awarded within one year following execution of the grant agreement, and the operations must commence within six months following award of the operations contract. If no services contract for operations is necessary, the operations project must commence within one year of execution of the grant agreement. 1.1.4 Funding for Equipment or Vehicles Grants. If the grant will fund equipment or vehicles, the project must be completed according to the schedule provided in the grant agreement, but at the latest, any necessary purchase contracts for equipment or vehicles must be awarded within one year following execution of the grant agreement, and use of the equipment or vehicles for the benefit of the public must commence within six months following award of the purchase contract. 2. Project Milestone and Completion Deadline Extensions 2.1. Schedules within grant agreements may include project scopes and schedules that will identify interim milestones in addition to those described in Section 1 of this Policy. Grant recipients may receive extensions on their project schedules of up to six months for good cause. Extensions of up to six months aggregate that would not cause the project to miss a completion deadline in Section 1 may be approved by the SANDAG Executive Director. Extensions beyond six months aggregate or that would cause the project to miss a completion deadline in Section 1 must be approved by the Policy Advisory Committee that has been delegated the necessary authority by the Board. For an extension to be granted under this Section 2, the following conditions must be met: 2.1.1. For extension requests of up to six months, the grantee must request the extension in writing to the SANDAG Program Manager at least two weeks prior to the earliest project schedule milestone deadline for which an extension is being requested. The Executive Director or designee will determine whether the extension should be granted. The Executive Director’s action will be reported out to the Board in following month’s report of delegated actions. 2.1.2. A grantee seeking an extension must document previous efforts undertaken to maintain the project schedule, explain the reasons for the delay, explain why the delay is unavoidable, and demonstrate an ability to succeed in the extended time frame the grantee proposes. 2.1.3. If the Executive Director denies an extension request under this Section 2, the grantee may appeal within ten business days of receiving the Executive Director’s 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 277 3 response to the responsible Policy Advisory Committee by sending the appeal to the SANDAG Program Manager. 2.1.4. Extension requests that are rejected by the Policy Advisory Committee will result in termination of the grant agreement and obligation by the grantee to return to SANDAG any unexpended funds within 30 days. Unexpended funds are funds for project costs not incurred prior to rejection of the extension request by the Policy Advisory Committee. 3. Project Delays and Extensions in Excess of Six Months 3.1. Requests for extensions in excess of six months, or that will cause a project to miss a completion deadline in Section 1 (including those projects that were already granted extensions by the Executive Director and are again falling behind schedule), will be considered by the Policy Advisory Committee upon request to the SANDAG Program Manager. 3.2 A grantee seeking an extension must document previous efforts undertaken to maintain the project schedule, explain the reasons for the delay, explain why the delay is unavoidable, and demonstrate an ability to succeed in the extended time frame the grantee proposes. The grantee must provide the necessary information to SANDAG staff to place in a report to the Policy Advisory Committee. If sufficient time is available, and the grant utilized TransNet funds, the request will first be taken to the Independent Taxpayer Advisory Committee (ITOC) for a recommendation. The grantee should make a representative available at the meeting to present the information to, and/or answer questions from, the ITOC and Policy Advisory Committee. 3.3 The Policy Advisory Committee will only grant an extension under this Section 3 for extenuating circumstances that the grantee could not have reasonably foreseen. 4. Resolution and Execution of the Grant Agreement 4.1 Two weeks prior to the review by the Policy Advisory Committee of the proposed grants, prospective grantees must submit a resolution from their authorized governing body that includes the provisions in this Subsection 4.1. Failure to provide a resolution that meets the requirements in this Subsection 4.1 will result in rejection of the application and the application will be dropped from consideration with funding going to the next project as scored by the evaluation committee. In order to assist grantees in meeting this resolution deadline, when SANDAG issues the call for projects it will allow at least 90 days for grant application submission. 4.1.1 Grantee governing body commits to providing the amount of matching funds set forth in the grant application. 4.1.2 Grantee governing body authorizes staff to accept the grant funding and execute a grant agreement if an award is made by SANDAG. 4.2 Grantee’s authorized representative must execute the grant agreement within 45 days from the date SANDAG presents the grant agreement to the prospective grantee for 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 278 4 execution. Failure to meet the requirements in this Subsection 4.2 may result in revocation of the grant award. 5. Increased Availability of Funding Under this Policy 5.1. Grant funds made available as a result of the procedures in this Policy may be awarded to the next project on the recommended project priority list from the most recent project selection process, or may be added to the funds available for the next project funding cycle, at the responsible Policy Advisory Committee’s discretion. Any project that loses funding due to failure to meet the deadlines specified in this Policy may be resubmitted to compete for funding in a future call for grant applications. Adopted: January 2010 Amended: November 2014 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 279 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report | February 2016 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 280 Prepared for: City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Prepared by: 3900 5th Avenue, Suite 210 San Diego, CA 92103 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report February 2016 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 281 Page 2 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 4 1.1 Background Information ..................................................................................................................... 4 1.2 The Need for Bike Lanes ..................................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Report Overview ................................................................................................................................. 5 2.0 Community Input .................................................................................................................................... 7 2.1 Community Workshop Series #1 ........................................................................................................ 7 2.2 Community Workshop Series #2 ...................................................................................................... 13 3.0 Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................................ 21 3.1 Posted Speeds and Traffic Volumes ................................................................................................. 21 3.2 Curb‐to‐Curb Widths ........................................................................................................................ 21 3.3 Right‐Turn Only Lanes ....................................................................................................................... 23 3.4 Dual Left‐Turn Lanes ......................................................................................................................... 23 3.5 Bus Stops ........................................................................................................................................... 23 3.6 Raised Medians ................................................................................................................................. 25 3.7 Vehicular Arterial Segment Level of Service .................................................................................... 25 3.8 On‐Street Parking.............................................................................................................................. 26 3.9 Bicycle Collisions ............................................................................................................................... 31 3.10 Bicycle Counts ................................................................................................................................... 32 4.0 Alternative Development ...................................................................................................................... 35 4.1 C Street to E Street Alternative Designs ........................................................................................... 35 4.2 E Street to F Street Alternative Designs ........................................................................................... 36 4.3 F Street to L Street Alternative Designs ........................................................................................... 36 4.4 L Street to Main Street Alternative Designs ..................................................................................... 37 5.0 Preferred Alternative ............................................................................................................................ 38 5.1 C Street to G Street ........................................................................................................................... 38 5.2 G Street to L Street ........................................................................................................................... 39 5.3 L Street to Main Street ..................................................................................................................... 39 5.4 Additional Considerations ................................................................................................................ 40 List of Tables Table 2‐1 Community Preferred Design Alternative by Segment ....................................................... 18 Table 3‐1 Street Segment Performance Standards and Volumes ...................................................... 25 Table 3‐2 Broadway Segment ADT and LOS ........................................................................................ 26 Table 3‐3 Broadway Parking Inventory and Occupancy Study ........................................................... 27 Table 3‐4 PM Peak Period Bicycle Counts (4PM‐6PM) ....................................................................... 32 Table 3‐5 H Street to I Street Count Comparison (2010 vs. 2015) ..................................................... 34 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 282 Page 3 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report List of Figures Figure 1‐1 Urban Core Specific Plan Cross‐Section ................................................................................ 6 Figure 2‐1 Community Workshop Series #1 – Public Input C Street to F Street Segment .................... 9 Figure 2‐2 Community Workshop Series #1 – Public Input F Street to L Street Segment .................. 10 Figure 2‐3 Community Workshop Series #1 – Public Input L Street to Main Street Segment ............ 11 Figure 2‐4 C Street to E Street Design Alternatives.............................................................................. 14 Figure 2‐5 E Street to F Street Design Alternatives .............................................................................. 15 Figure 2‐6 F Street to L Street Design Alternatives .............................................................................. 16 Figure 2‐7 L Street to Main Street Design Alternatives ........................................................................ 17 Figure 3‐1 Existing Curb‐to‐Curb Widths, Vehicular Volumes, and Intersection Diagrams ................ 22 Figure 3‐2 NACTO Combined Bike Lane – Right‐Turn Only Lane Configurations ................................ 24 Figure 3‐3 Observed On‐Street Parking Occupancy along Broadway .................................................. 28 Figure 3‐4 Businesses Potentially Affected by Loss of On‐Street Parking ........................................... 29 Figure 3‐5 Bicycle‐Involved Collisions (2009 – 2013) ........................................................................... 30 Figure 3‐6 Primary Collision Factor Category (2009 – 2013) ............................................................... 31 Figure 3‐7 Bicycle‐Involved Collisions by Year (2009 – 2013) .............................................................. 31 Figure 3‐8 Broadway Bicycle Counts (June 2015) ................................................................................ 33 Figure 5‐1 C Street to G Street Preferred Alternative .......................................................................... 38 Figure 5‐2 G Street to L Street Preferred Alternative .......................................................................... 39 Figure 5‐3 L Street to Main Street Preferred Alternative..................................................................... 40 Figure 5‐4 Road Diet Implementation Thresholds by Agency.............................................................. 40 Figure 5‐5 Existing and Future Vehicular Volumes .............................................................................. 41 Appendices Appendix A – Rails‐to‐Trails Memo: Accommodating Bicycle on Broadway Appendix B – Parcel Addresses Potentially Impacted by On‐Street Parking Loss Appendix C – Bicycle Count Sheets Appendix D – Preferred Alternative Striping Plan Appendix E – FHWA Road Diet Informational Guide 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 283 Page 4 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report 1.0 Introduction Cycling and bicycle facilities are increasingly gaining attention from local and regional agencies as one method for addressing complex urban issues, such as traffic congestion, greenhouse gas emissions, community health, and economic revitalization. The Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study builds on previous and on‐going efforts to make the City of Chula Vista more bicycle friendly, including the 2011 Bikeway Master Plan which recommended implementing a Class III Bicycle Route along Broadway through Chula Vista. The Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study is intended to review potential options and make recommendations for installing bicycle facilities along the Broadway corridor in Chula Vista, from C Street to Main Street. 1.1 Background Information Broadway was classified as a Bike Route following the adoption of the 2011 Bikeway Master Plan, and enhanced with shared lane markings or “sharrows” and vertical signage to help alert motorists to anticipate cyclists. This classification was assigned largely due to the constraints posed by a combination of existing lane widths and the curb‐to‐ curb dimensions along Broadway which makes implementing a continuous bicycle lane difficult without roadway modifications. However, the outreach conducted in support of the 2011 Bikeway Master Plan indicated a need and desire for improved bicycle conditions along Broadway. In 2011 the Rails‐to‐Trails Conservancy, funded by a Healthy Transportation Network Technical Assistance Grant, conducted a field visit of Broadway to determine the need and feasibility of implementing bicycle lanes along Broadway. The results of the field visit were summarized in a memorandum title Accommodating Bicycles on Broadway, which is included as Appendix A. The Conservancy concluded “the City of Chula Vista will improve traffic safety and neighborhood livability by accommodating bicycling on Broadway” and ultimately recommended the installation of bicycle lanes along Broadway, from C Street to Main Street. The recommendations were based on the following observations:  “Bicyclists are already traveling along Broadway, both for the purpose of through travel as the parallel routes are not continuous, and to access the services and business that are located on Broadway;  Traffic volumes and vehicle speeds are too high on Broadway for bicyclists to share the lane with motorists, and no bike lanes exist to provide a safer space for bicycling;  Therefore, bicyclists most often ride on the sidewalks which presents serious hazards at intersections and degrades the pedestrian environment” 2011 Bikeway Master Plan Comments Related to Broadway “Road diet on Broadway – one with bike lanes.” “Make Broadway road dieted – reduce number of travel lanes, add bike lanes.” “Sequence traffic lights on Broadway for bike speeds – 12 mph.” “West side needs more awareness of bike traffic.” “My favorite route northbound is Broadway – Easy connectivity north‐south if cyclist is okay taking the lane.” 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 284 Page 5 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report 1.2 The Need for Bike Lanes Broadway is a heavily traveled corridor traversing western Chula Vista. Broadway connects to the City of National City to the north, and to the City of San Diego to the south. The corridor provides access to many commercial and industrial businesses, shopping centers, multi‐family residential complexes, residential neighborhoods, and two elementary schools. Additionally, the corridor is a transit route for the MTS 932 Bus, which serves the South Bay from the 8th Street Transit Center in National City down to the Iris Avenue Transit Center, just north of the SR‐905. Broadway currently has a designated Class III Bike Route, identifiable by vertical signage and shared lane arrow markings or “sharrows” on the pavement, however, this may not be an appropriate bicycle facility due to the vehicular speeds and volumes. During the Bicycle Master Plan update process several years ago, many community members expressed the desire for a bicycle lane or other facility type that would provide for more protection than a bicycle route. Bike routes indicate to motorists and cyclists that the outside travel lane should be shared. Many cyclists or potential cyclists, however, may be deterred from mixing with vehicles along Broadway due to high traffic speeds and volumes. The Urban Core Specific Plan (UCSP) adopted by City Council shows that Broadway will ultimately have Class II Bike Lanes within the UCSP area, from C Street to L Street. Figure 1‐1 is a cross‐section excerpt taken from the Chula Vista Urban Core Specific Plan proposing bike lanes on Broadway, between C Street and L Street. 1.3 Report Overview This report presents an analysis of existing constraints to be considered when evaluating potential bicycle facility alternatives along the Broadway corridor. Chapter 2 summarizes the public engagement efforts conducted in support of the project. Chapter 3 examines the existing roadway characteristics along Broadway. Additionally, this chapter describes available on‐street parking and provides a snapshot of parking utilization along the corridor. The existing conditions analysis concludes with a review of bicycle‐involved collisions (2009 – 2013) and existing bicycle demand along the corridor. Chapter 4 describes the alternatives development process and describes the different alternatives that were considered. Chapter 5 concludes the report by presenting the preferred alternative. Cyclists currently navigate between moving traffic and cars parked on‐street. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 285 Fg. 5.34Proposed Broadway from C Street to L Street (Source: Kimley-Horn and Associates) 82’ *At intersections, parking is removed to allow for 14’ median * Figure 1-1Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Draft Report Urban Core Specific Plan Cross-Section 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 286 Page 7 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report 2.0 Community Input Community participation is an important component of the planning process. As such, two series of workshops were held in support of the Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study to present project information to the public, solicit feedback to shape the Study, and to assist with selecting the preferred alternative design concept to move forward with. This Chapter provides a summary of the two community workshops and the input collected. 2.1 Community Workshop Series #1 The first workshop series included three identical sessions, held on July 29th, 30th and August 3rd at the Chula Vista City Hall Council Chambers. Three sessions were held on different days of the week to maximize opportunities for public attendance. The initial series was scheduled to occur shortly after completion of one of the first key deliverables, the Existing Constraints Report. The workshop introduced the project to the community, presented the work completed to date, and allowed for the project team to learn from community members and Broadway users about their future vision for Broadway, perceived bicycle conflicts, on‐street parking concerns, and recommendations for moving the project forward. The workshop flyer was mailed to over 1,700 property owners along and adjacent to the Broadway corridor and advertised through the following stakeholders identified by the project team and City staff:  San Diego MTS  SANDAG  Southwest Civic Association  Crossroads II Civic Association  BikeWalkChulaVista  San Diego County Bike Coalition  Circulate San Diego  Chula Vista School District  Chula Vista Community Collaborative  Chula Vista Fire Department  Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce  Norman Park Senior Center  San Diego County Health & Human Services  City of National City  Otay Mesa‐Nestor Community Planning Group  City of San Diego Additionally, flyers were distributed to and posted at local bike shops within Chula Vista, including the following locations:  Baja Bikes  Bicycle Warehouse  Chula Vista Bikes  Performance Bicycle  Pulse Endurance Sports  REI Chula Vista  South Bay Bicycles  Trek The workshop opened with a PowerPoint presentation reviewing the project and workshop purpose as well as informational components regarding the benefits of bicycling and Complete Streets and an overview of bicycle facilities. The Existing Constraints Report was also presented, summarizing curb‐to‐curb widths, presence of right‐turn only lanes and dual left‐turn lanes, raised medians, on‐street parking inventory and utilization, bicycle counts and bicycle collisions. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 287 Page 8 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report Following the presentation, participants were asked to assist the project team in identifying existing issues along the corridor on a large satellite imagery plot of the entire 3.9‐mile long project area, with a focus on bicycle conflicts, parking constraints, and general recommendations to improve the corridor for bicycle mobility. Figure 2‐1 through Figure 2‐3 display the public input recorded on each of the three identified Broadway segments, distinct by the varying curb‐to‐curb widths. Additionally, participants were provided the option to record general comments onto comment cards or submit through email. The following comments were collected via comment cards or emails: 1. “Any opportunities for protected bike lanes should be pursued. Looking for creative solutions along intersections near transit, E Street, H Street, and Palomar Street.” 2. “I would love to see protected bikeways on Broadway. I prefer these to buffered or plain bike lanes to make more space between me and cars.” 3. “I highly support a bike lane on Broadway for safety and economic reasons. It is a perfect corridor for biking as it is a flat area to bike and any bike and all types of cyclists can handle it.” 4. “This is a grant project. I am in support of it. I would like a protected bikeway throughout the entire corridor. We need more bike/pedestrian improvements not only to improve safety and livability but to stimulate economic development and encourage businesses that appeal to millennials.” 5. “I am strongly supportive of the project. I would like to see Class I [Bike Path] or II [Bike Lane] facilities, highly visible crosswalks, and a protected intersection on F Street/Broadway. Also, would be a super cool street for a Ciclovia event!” 6. “Support for safe, well‐connected and comfortable riding treatment along the project corridor (Broadway). Good data presented this evening – shows parking under 50% capacity that may present opportunities to place safe facilities. Minimum of Class II (buffered) bike lanes, with preference to explore Class IV [cycle track] protected options. Reduce collisions, especially in high collision corridor. Placing safer bike lanes will increase ridership and decrease collisions.” 7. “You need input from the businesses, not the bicycle coalition – most of whom do not live or work in Chula Vista. We at SWCVCA are most concerned with L to Main, but the businesses to the north are also in need of the on street parking. All you have to do is drive along Broadway to see how many people park on the street to go to the businesses.” 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 288 TS C TS D TS REWOLF MCINTOSHTS ESAVTS ELA CHULATSIV ATS SSACETS NAML DAVIDSONST ES T TS F 04 00 20 0 F e e t ² Ph y s i c a l p e d r e f u g e @ C V S t r e e t Bi k e P a r k i n g @ Z o r b a ’ s & F i l l i p p i ’ s , r e g i o n a l de s t i n a t i o n s f o r f o o d Ad d “ p r o t e c t e d i n t e r s e c t i o n ” at E S t r e e t & B r o a d w a y Add “protected intersection”at F Street & Broadway Wh i l e F S t r e e t P r o m e n a d e is a g r e a t p l a n , w e s t i l l n e e d im p r o v e m e n t s f o r E S t r e e t . St a t i s t i c a l l y d a n g e r o u s & t h e Tr o l l e y s t a t i o n a t t r a c t s t r i p s . Bi k e p a r k i n g a t b a r a t Da v i d s o n S t r e e t & Br o a d w a y In support of F Street Promenade (N a t i o n a l C i t y ’ s ) Br i d g e o v e r S R - 5 4 i s v e r y sc a r y . V e h i c l e l a n e s n e e d na r r o w i n g f o r b i k e l a n e s . Figure 2-1 Bi k e L a n e s o n B r o a d w a y Fe a s i b i l i t y S t u d y D r a f t R e p o r t Co m m u n i t y W o r k s h o p # 1 - P u b l i c I n p u t C S t r e e t t o F S t r e e t S e g m e n t 20 1 6 - 0 9 - 2 0 Ag e n d a Pa c k e t Page 289 I S T PA R K W Y H S T G S T OT I S S T K S T VA N C E S T L ST F S T J S T ROO SEVELT S T SI E RR A W Y HA L S E Y S T ² 0 800400Feet Add “protected intersection” at F Street & Broadway Ped refuge and crossing needed at Roosevelt Street J Street is a critical east/west corridor for biking. Safe crossing needed. Crosswalks needed at Sierra Way & Broadway High demand for parking at thrift shop Flip the car parking and bikeway [bikeway against the curb] Bike parking in front of the steakhouse Make the most dangerous parts of the corridor a protected bicycle facility In support of F Street Promenade Bike parking needed in front of Amvets. This is a regional destination. High visibility crosswalks needed at all signalized intersections Protected bikeway throughout Broadway Figure 2-2Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Draft Report Community Workshop #1 - Public Input F Street to L Street Segment 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 290 TS SSOM MAIN ST NAS SELPT L ST ARS ANOZ IT ANITA ST CRESTEDTTUB E ST OXFORD ST LAPOTS RAM ²0 80 0 40 0 F e e t ne e d e d a t P a l o m a r S t r e e t Main & Broadway is a very cyclists Ma k e p e d e s t r i a n t r a i l s a n d bi k e c o r r i d o r w i t h i n S D G & E tr a n s m i s s i o n l i n e c o r r i d o r Le a d p e d e s t r i a n i n t e r v a l si g n a l a t P a l o m a r S t r e e t In f o r m a l c a r s a l e s f r o m Pa l o m a r S t r e e t t o Na p l e s S t r e e t [Asphalt] uplift at the conrete transit pads - Ge n e r a l C o m m e n t : Ci t y C o u n c i l n e e d s t o k n o w bu s i n e s s o w n e r s w e r e p r o v i d e d th e o p p o r t u n i t y f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n Ge n e r a l C o m m e n t : Bu s i n e s s o w n e r s w i l l s h o w u p wh e n r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a r e on t h e t a b l e . Ap a r t m e n t s d o n ’ t h a v e e n o u g h pa r k i n g f r o m O x f o r d S t r e e t t o Pa l o m a r S t r e e t Ex c e s s o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g fr o m N a p l e s S t r e e t t o Ox f o r d S t r e e t Pa l o m a r S t r e e t & B r o a d w a y is v e r y b u s y , l o t s o f p e d s t o o , in t e r s e c t i o n t o a v o i d Figure 2-3 Bi k e L a n e s o n B r o a d w a y Fe a s i b i l i t y S t u d y D r a f t R e p o r t Co m m u n i t y W o r k s h o p # 1 - P u b l i c I n p u t L S t r e e t t o M a i n S t r e e t S e g m e n t 20 1 6 - 0 9 - 2 0 Ag e n d a Pa c k e t Page 291 Page 12 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report 8. “I have been living in Chula Vista for over 15 years, and I am a regular cyclist in the area. Ideally I would like to see bike lanes along Broadway have physical barriers between cyclists and the cars. There seems to be sufficient space in the right‐of‐way for most of the street. Perhaps it can be a long‐term goal. See concept: 9. “Unfortunately August 3 is our regularly scheduled meeting at the library so we cannot attend but we believe that Fifth Ave. should be the bike route not Broadway. Broadway is a busy commercial street. The parking is important to the businesses, since few of them have alternative parking that is adequate. The city needs to support its businesses, number one. NO PARKING SHOULD BE eliminated without discussing it personally with each and every business that will be impacted. The city needs to stop trying to put people out of business and instead help them stay in business. We have enough of a horrible jobs/housing balance now and they keep making it worse instead of better. Also bikes should not be allowed on the block between Oxford and Naples since the congestion there makes driving difficult and no one in their right mind would ride a bicycle to COSTCO. On the rare occasion when I have seen a bicycle there it was very difficult to avoid him with the three or four other cars I was trying to avoid colliding with as we all tried to move where we wanted to go in gridlock. The only possible way to put a bike lane on Broadway would be to eliminate the medians. Bicycles should not be allowed at the intersection of Broadway, Orange and Palomar that intersection is also incredibly impacted always. They could use Fifth Ave. and come up the appropriate street to visit whatever Broadway business and walk their bikes on the sidewalk. This is not an appropriate corridor.” 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 292 Page 13 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report 2.2 Community Workshop Series #2 The second workshop series presented conceptual designs to the public for review and comment. The community input was used to help identify the preferred design alternative for bicycle facilities along Broadway. The second workshop series included two public sessions and one presentation to the Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce. The two public sessions were held September 21st and October 1st, at the Chula Vista City Hall Council Chambers and the South Chula Vista Library, respectively. In addition to the workshop advertisement methods used for the first workshop, flyers were hand delivered to businesses along Broadway, with an emphasis on those identified as having limited off‐street parking (further described in Chapter 3). The workshop opened with a PowerPoint presentation reviewing some of the key existing conditions findings related to curb‐to‐curb widths, on‐street parking availability and demand, bicycle counts, and bicycle collisions. Following the existing conditions review, conceptual design alternatives were presented to the public for consideration. The Broadway corridor was divided into four segments by varying roadway curb‐to‐curb widths and presence of a center two‐way left‐turn lanes. The design alternatives for each segment took the roadway characteristics into consideration in the development of proposed bicycle facilities. The four segments and the number of design alternatives are listed below.  C Street to E Street (0.50 miles) – 3 designs  E Street to F Street (0.25 miles) – 2 designs  F Street to L Street (1.50 miles) – 2 designs  L Street to Main Street (1.63 miles) – 2 designs Each design alternative was presented by identifying the type of bicycle facility, number of travel lanes, type and presence of a median, and presence of on‐street parking. Following the presentation, large graphics of the alternatives were displayed on boards and attendees were invited to review and compare the designs. Project team staff were present at each alternative to assist with questions. Attendees were then encouraged to identify their preferred design alternative for each segment by placing a sticker on it. Figure 2‐4 through Figure 2‐8 display the conceptual design alternatives presented at the second workshop. Table 2‐1 displays the total number of votes each alternative received for each segment. The alternative that received the most votes for each segment is highlighted in blue. It should be noted that the total number of votes for each segment are not equal to one another as some participants chose not to vote on every segment. Additionally, the number of votes received by the most popular design was not an overwhelming majority for any of the segments. Workshop participants examine aerial imagery of the Broadway corridor. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 293 Figure 2-4Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Draft Report C Street to E Street Design Alternatives C Street to E Street Design Alternatives Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 294 Figure 2-5Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Draft Report E Street to F Street Design Alternatives E Street to F Street Design Alternatives Alternative 2 Alternative 1 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 295 Figure 2-6Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Draft Report F Street to L Street Design Alternatives Alternative 2 Alternative 1 F Street to L Street Design Alternatives 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 296 Figure 2-7Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Draft Report L Street to Main Street Design Alternatives Alternative 2 Alternative 1 L Street to Main Street Design Alternatives 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 297 Page 18 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report Table 2-1 Community Preferred Design Alternative by Segment Segment Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 C Street to E Street ‐‐ 4 9 E Street to F Street 3 7 NA F Street to L Street 9 6 NA L Street to Main Street 5 6 NA Source: Chen Ryan Associates, December 2015 As shown, the most popular design alternative from C Street to E Street was #3, which includes buffered bike lanes, on‐street parking on each side of Broadway, a continuous two‐way left‐turn lane, and reduces the roadway to two travel lanes. From E Street to F Street the most popular design alternative was #2, which includes buffered bike lanes, on‐street parking on each side of Broadway, a continuous two‐way left‐turn lane, and reduces the roadway to two travel lanes. From F Street to L Street the most popular design alternative was #1, which includes bike lanes, on‐street parking on each side of Broadway, a continuous two‐way left‐turn lane, and maintains four travel lanes. From L Street to Main Street the most popular design alternative was #2, which includes buffered bike lanes, on‐street parking on each side of Broadway, a raised median with left‐turn pockets, and reduces the roadway to two travel lanes. Additionally, participants were provided the option to record general comments via comment cards or submit through email. The following comments were collected: 1. “Thanks for sending me designs and for allowing MTS to provide comments. Below are some comments and considerations regarding the designs proposed for the Bike Lanes on Broadway Project: a. Any road traffic capacity reductions should be made in consideration of transit vehicle routing so as to not adversely impact system speed and efficiency. b. Traffic calming measures should be planned in consideration of transit vehicle routing. This includes measures that lower effective speed that could preclude an effective routing for a transit vehicle, especially along a high transit use corridor such as along Broadway. This is including, but not limited to, total lane reductions, lane width reductions, and other traffic calming measures. c. Lane widths: These should be planned in consideration of Transit vehicles. A lane width of 10 feet along a transit corridor creates a safety concern due to the width 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 298 Page 19 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report of a Transit vehicle, including mirrors, effectively being 10 feet. The limited space may create conflicts with parked cars and/or bicycles. d. Bicycle infrastructure improvements should be planned in consideration of bus stops and bus turning movements. For instance, modifying travel lanes near bus stops and intersections where buses make turns may adversely affect current, or even preclude planned, bus service to the area. e. When working out further details for the Bike Plan, keep in mind locations where bikes and buses will interact. Specifically call out bus stop locations in order to plan for smooth transitions and minimize conflicts.” 2. “Great project! I fully support it. Road diet (with conversion of a travel lane into buffered bike lane) with preservation of on‐street parking is a fair compromise. When talking about LOS please balance it with benefits to public safety.” 3. “Keep it as is. Business owner at 132, 134, 136 Broadway. Businesses on our section between D & E need on‐street parking. If they didn’t have it, their customers would not go to their businesses. This is their livelihood and not just a hobby. This supports their families. Please DO NOT take away parking!!! Thank you.” 4. “I think these bike lanes are essential for Chula Vista’s future – in terms of long‐term health, sustainability and business – slowing down traffic allows more time to notice businesses that may have been missed. I hope we can all come to a solution that pleases officials, business owners, cyclists, and residents alike. I love the visuals provided – it kept everything easy to understand despite the variety of alternatives provided. 5. “We need more road diets and traffic calming throughout Broadway with buffered bike lanes. We need more signs to educate drivers about the 3 ft. space cyclists need to be safe – safe bike lanes more people will ride!!” 6. “As a millennial from Chula Vista I am very supportive of this project. I support the option that maximizes safety for all people. The more protection the bikeway can provide, the better. The numbers about low parking utilization are very compelling. Looking forward to a safe bikeway, driving experience, and walking experience.” 7. “I am in favor of the bike lanes with buffers. I just started cycling and when I get to a section with buffered lanes I feel so much safer. I feel that the drivers themselves as well feel more comfortable when they see buffered lanes that separate the bicyclists away from them.” 8. “On the L to Main Street[s] stretch there are condo complexes that don’t have guest parking. Taking all parking away on Broadway would be very inconvenient for the people in those complexes. Accordingly, either no bike lane there would be a good option or reducing traffic lanes to one in each direction is my suggestion. 9. “Single lane would kill business on Broadway! No parking in front of business would put the business out!” 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 299 Page 20 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report 10. “I think we should leave as is. But also give serious consideration to have 5th [Avenue] become 1‐way with bike lanes a good alternative to carry the bulk of riders or distant riders.” 11. “I strongly favor installing bike lanes on Broadway. I would hope for buffered bike lanes because it is safer for the cyclist because of the mandated 3 ft law when passing cyclists. I think the road diet would benefit both the cyclist and business owners as the drivers notice the business more when driving slower.” 12. “Common Sense. People drive a car at 25 mph and drive into business places. Bikes and walkers can watch better from the sidewalk. Not as fast but safer. The bikes and skateboards could pass safely if the sidewalk were divided and enforced and cars stopping before entering.” 13. “Love the bike lanes. Demonstrates that Chula Vista is progressive and at the forefront of innovative change. I am a physician in Chula Vista and can speak for 20 colleagues who are all in favor of bike lanes because 1) they are safer and 2) they promote healthy living for families and children.” 14. “C Street to E Street. I like option 3 [road diet] to allow for street parking for businesses that do not have parking. Please do not take away our customer parking.” 15. “I’m in favor of not changing Broadway other than a limit to the size of trucks that would be able to park on Broadway. Many large trucks protrude out too far into lanes on Broadway.” 16. “As commercial property owners – I would like to see the bikes on 5th Avenue – there are some businesses that will be drastically affected. 5th Avenue is much safer than Broadway for bikes. Thank you.” 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 300 Page 21 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report 3.0 Existing Conditions This Chapter describes the existing roadway conditions along Broadway. The potential constraints posed by the existing roadway conditions, particularly curb‐to‐curb widths, were important considerations to inform the development of bike lane alternatives requiring minimal roadway modifications. Additionally, this Chapter provides a review of existing on‐street parking availability and parking utilization. Chapter 3 concludes with a description of bicycle‐involved collisions (2009 – 2011) and existing bicycle demand as identified by bicycle counts conducted in support of this project. 3.1 Posted Speeds and Traffic Volumes The posted speed limit along Broadway is 35 MPH, which may make the existing Class III Bike Route undesirable for many cyclists or potential cyclists. Additionally, high vehicular volumes contribute to the unfavorable perception of the Broadway bicycling environment. Figure 3‐1 shows existing vehicle volumes, curb‐to‐curb widths, and major intersection geometrics. As shown, average daily traffic volumes range from a high of 29,200 from Anita Street to Main Street and 27,500 from Moss Street to Naples Street, to a low of 18,200 from C Street to D Street. As a four‐lane roadway, Broadway could accommodate 30,000 to 33,750 ADT and still maintain LOS D according to the currently adopted Transportation Element. 3.2 Curb-to-Curb Widths Curb‐to‐curb widths vary from approximately 70 feet, between C Street and F Street, to 82 feet, between L Street and Main Street. As shown in Figure 3‐1, there are approximately three major sections of Broadway, defined by their curb‐to‐curb width:  70 Feet – From C Street to F Street  80 Feet – From F Street to L Street  82 Feet – From L Street to Main Street The transition in width south of F Street provides an additional 4 feet for the outside lane/parking area in each direction, as well as a wider center‐left‐turn lane. South of L Street, where the curb‐ to‐curb has the greatest width, a raised landscaped median is present. The changes in curb‐to‐ curb width were important considerations as they could necessitate changes in bicycle facility designs. Examples of variations considered based on changing curb‐to‐curb widths include varying vehicular lane widths, presence of on‐street parking, varying bike facility widths, and presence of a buffered bike lane in some locations. 35 MPH posted speed limit along the Broadway bike route. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 301 Palomar St Anita St F St G St H St L St Moss St Naples S t Oxford S t I St J St K St C St 1 8 . 2 Main St Existing Curb-to-Curb Widths 70’ Curb-to-Curb (4-Lane with Center Left-Turn Lane and Parking) 82’ Curb-to-Curb (4-Lane with 18’ raised median) 80’ Curb-to-Curb (4-Lane with Center Left-Turn Lane and Parking) 1.5 Miles 1.7 Miles 0.75 Miles 2 0 . 6 2 2 . 0 2 2 . 8 2 2 . 8 2 3 . 0 2 6 . 0 2 3 . 9 2 7 . 5 2 5 . 2 2 4 . 8 2 9 . 2 D St E St XX.X Average Daily Traffic Volumes (in thousands) Figure 3-1Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Draft Report Source: City of Chula Vista Traffic Volumes Years 2009, 2013, 2014 & 2015; SANDAG Series 12 Regional Model Base Year 2008 Unadjusted Volume Existing Curb-to-Curb Widths, Vehicular Volumes, and Intersection Diagrams 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 302 Page 23 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report 3.3 Right-Turn Only Lanes Figure 3‐1 includes intersection diagrams for the Broadway approaches of 16 intersections, including 9 intersections with right‐turn‐only lanes. These dedicated turn lanes create an additional constraint for bike facility implementation. Intersections without right‐turn‐only lanes generally have sufficient width to carry the bike lane up to the intersection, however, right‐turn‐only lanes require additional considerations. Examples of options considered to accommodate bike facilities at these constrained intersections include, but are not limited to, the following:  Dropping the bike lane when the right‐turn‐only lane begins,  Removal of the right‐turn‐only lane and maintain the bike lane,  Transition the bike lane to a bike route by implementing shared lane arrow markings on the turn lane pavement and mount vertical signage, and  Striping the lane as a combined bike lane/right‐turn only lane (shown in Figure 3‐2). 3.4 Dual Left-Turn Lanes Dual left‐turn lanes limit the ability to acquire space for bicycle facility, similar to right‐turn‐only lanes. They differ in that the left‐turn lane cannot be shared with the bike facility due to its central location in the roadway. As demonstrated by Figure 3‐1, the intersections of Broadway and H Street, and Broadway and Palomar Street include dual left‐turn lanes at both northbound and southbound Broadway approaches. Both of these intersections also include dedicated right‐turn‐ only lanes along each Broadway approach, further limiting the ability to acquire space for bicycle facilities. 3.5 Bus Stops Bus stops require additional attention, due to the infrastructure in place that may limit the ability to move or alter a stop location in a cost effective manner. Bus stops are identified on the preferred design striping plan. Many bus stops along Broadway have a bus pad in place to indicate to the operator where the appropriate place to stop is located. Additionally, bus stops may interrupt the operation of bicycle facilities, forcing cyclists to either wait for the bus to continue or to change into the adjacent lane to pass, and creating a potential conflict with vehicles. The grey rectangle is a bus pad located just north of D Street on Broadway. Shared right‐turn only lane/bike lane in San Diego 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 303 Page 24 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report Figure 3‐2 NACTO Combined Bike Lane – Right‐Turn Only Lane Configurations Source: NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide (2014) Source: NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide (2014) 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 304 Page 25 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report 3.6 Raised Medians The southernmost segment of the Broadway study corridor, from L Street to Main Street, is unique in that a raised landscaped median is present throughout. The median is generally 18’ wide, narrowing to allow for left‐turn pockets and turn movements at intersections. The median limits the ability to modify travel lanes for the purposes of bicycle facility implementation. Narrowing lanes is an option for acquiring additional width to implement a bicycle facility along this segment of Broadway, as is parking lane removal. Narrowing or removing the landscaped median is another option to gain the width required to implement a bicycle facility. An additional consideration associated with median removal is the loss of landscaping. While median removal may reduce maintenance costs it will also result in losing the added visual benefits provided by the existing landscaping. 3.7 Vehicular Arterial Segment Level of Service Vehicular level of service (LOS) is a quantitative measure representing the quality of service from the driver’s perspective. The analysis of roadway segment LOS is based on the functional classification of the roadway, the maximum capacity, roadway geometrics, and existing or forecasted average daily traffic (ADT) volumes. Table 3‐1 shows acceptable LOS and volumes for Chula Vista’s street classifications. Table 3-1 Street Segment Performance Standards and Volumes Street Classification Acceptable LOS Acceptable Volume (ADT) Expressway C 70,000 Prime Arterial C 50,000 Major Street (six lanes) C 40,000 Major Street (four lanes) C 30,000 Class I Collector C 22,000 Town Center Arterial (four lanes) D 43,200 Gateway Street (six lanes) D 61,200 Gateway Street (four lanes) D 43,200 Urban Arterial D 37,800 Commercial Boulevard D 33,750 Downtown Promenade D 14,400 Source: City of Chula Vista Land Use and Transportation Element (2005) The existing Broadway median has established landscaping such as flowers or trees in many locations. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 305 Page 26 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report Broadway, from C Street to L Street, is classified as a 4‐lane Commercial Boulevard. From L Street to the City’s southern limit, Broadway is classified as a 4‐lane Major Street. Table 3‐2 displays the existing ADT volumes along Broadway arterial segment and whether or not the segment currently operates at an acceptable LOS. As shown, all Broadway segments are currently operating at an acceptable LOS. Table 3-2 Broadway Segment ADT and LOS Broadway Segment ADT (2013) Acceptable? (Yes or No) From C Street to E Street 18,243 Yes From E Street to F Street 20,550 Yes From F Street to I Street 22,033 Yes From I Street to L Street 22,985 Yes From L Street to Main Street 27,529 Yes Source: City of Chula Vista Traffic Volumes (2013) 3.8 On-Street Parking On‐street parking is an important consideration when evaluating roadway changes, even more so when the study area is heavily commercial, as is the case for the Broadway corridor. A parking inventory was performed to estimate the total number of on‐street parking spaces available along the three segments of the Broadway corridor, including from C Street to F Street; from F Street to L Street; and from L Street to Main Street. Additionally, a parking occupancy or parking utilization study was conducted to inform the project team of existing parking demand along the corridor. After consulting with business owners to determine when their greatest parking demand is experienced, the occupancy study was performed on a Saturday from 2:00 PM to 3:00 PM. Table 3‐3 summarizes the parking inventory field review and occupancy study conducted in June 2015. As shown, there are approximately 703 parking spaces along Broadway from C Street to Main Street. The F Street to L Street segment was found to have approximately 48% of curb length allocated to parking, the greatest of the three segments, while C Street to F Street had the least curb available for parking with 35%. The occupancy study found the greatest parking occupancy to be 58% of available spaces for the segment of F Street to L Street. Slightly lower parking occupancy rates were observed along the segments between L Street and Main Street (41%), and between C Street and F Street (44%). These findings generally demonstrate that existing parking supply exceeds demand during the peak parking demand period, as identified by businesses with limited or no on‐site parking. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 306 Page 27 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report Table 3-3 Broadway Parking Inventory and Occupancy Study Data Category C Street to F Street F Street to L Street L Street to Main Street Total Roadway Mileage (miles) 0.75 1.50 1.70 3.95 Total Curb Length (feet) 7,037 14,160 15,595 36,792 No Parking Length (feet) 4,550 7,348 9,742 21,640 Parking Length (feet) 2,487 6,812 5,853 15,152 Parking Spaces (19 feet each) 115 313 275 703 Percent of Curb Available for Parking 35% 48% 38% 41% Percent Occupied1 44% 58% 41% 49% Note: 1. The occupancy study was performed on Saturday, June 27, 2015 from 2:00 PM – 3:00 PM Figure 3‐3 displays the parking occupancy analysis results, depicting parking utilization along the three segments for both the west and east sides of Broadway, as well as locations where parking is not permitted at any time. As shown in Figure 3‐3, both sides of Broadway from F Street to L Street exhibit relatively higher occupancy rates, 55% occupancy on the east side and 60% on the west side. Both segments of Broadway, from C Street to F Street and from L Street to Main Street, experienced greater parking demand on the east side of Broadway compared to the west side. Due to large shopping center frontages at several locations, there is no on‐street parking today from H Street to I Street (east side), from Oxford Street to Palomar Street (west side), and from Anita Street to 400’ north of Main Street (east and west side). Figure 3‐4 displays parcels with zero or limited off‐street parking spaces. Parcels with limited off‐ street parking were identified as having parking accessible only via the alley, which is commonly used for employees and has limited visibility from the street. The parcels without off‐street parking were further categorized by the distance to the nearest on‐street parking. As shown, one parcel was identified as having zero off‐street parking spaces and the nearest on‐street parking at a distance greater than 300 feet. Six parcels were identified as having zero off‐street parking spaces and on‐street parking within 300 feet. Twenty‐eight parcels have limited off‐street parking. A list of the parcel addresses and business types are provided in Appendix B. These instances were found to be largely concentrated in three areas:  D Street to Flower Street - West side of Broadway: 4 parcels with limited off‐street parking; 1 parcel with zero off‐street parking and on‐street parking within 300 feet. - East side of Broadway: 1 parcel without off‐street parking  Davidson Street to F Street - West side of Broadway: 1 parcel without off‐street parking - East side of Broadway: 7 parcels with limited off‐street parking  I Street to J Street - West side of Broadway: 2 parcels with limited off‐street parking - East side of Broadway: 5 parcels with limited off‐street parking; 2 parcels without off‐street parking 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 307 Bike Lanes on BroadwayFeasibility Study Draft Report Figure 3-3 Observed On-Street Parking Occupancy along Broadway §¨¦5 ² 0 2,0001,000 Feet Data Collected between 2pm and 3pm on 6-27-15 C St F St L St Main St B r o a d w a y Percent Occupancy of Street Parking 53% - 60% 39% - 52% 32% - 38% No Parking Any Time Palomar St Anita St Naples St Oxford St Moss St K St J St I St H St G St F St E St D St City ofChula Vista 55 155 151 38% 60% 32% 60 158 124 49% 55% 52% C Street to F Street F Street to L Street L Street to Main Street ParkingSpaces PercentOccupied ParkingSpaces PercentOccupied West Side of Street East Side of Street Broadway Segment 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 308 Bike Lanes on BroadwayFeasibility Study Draft Report Figure 3-4 Businesses Potentially Affected by Loss of On-Street Parking §¨¦5 ² 0 2,0001,000 Feet C St F St L St Main St B r o a d w a y Businesses without Off-Street Parking (8 Businesses) Businesses with Limited Off-Street Parking (28 Businesses) Palomar St Anita St Naples St Oxford St Moss St K St J St I St H St G St F St E St D St D St F St J St 1 2 3 1 2 3 B r o a d w a y B r o a d w a y B r o a d w a y City ofChula Vista 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 309 Bike Lanes on BroadwayFeasibility Study Draft Report Figure 3-5 Bicycle-Involved Collisions (2009-2013) §¨¦5 ² 0 2,0001,000 Feet Source: SWITRS (2013) C St F St L St Main St B r o a d w a y Numbers of Collisions 2 1 Palomar St Anita St Naples St Oxford St Moss St K St J St I St H St G St F St E St D St City ofChula Vista 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 310 Page 31 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report 3.9 Bicycle Collisions Bicycle‐involved collision data was obtained from the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records Service (SWITRS) for the 5‐year period from 2009 – 2013. The data was geocoded and mapped to help identify locations where collisions have occurred and may require additional safety considerations. During the 5‐year period, 33 bicycle involved collisions were reported along Broadway within the study area. Figure 3‐5 (on the preceding page) displays the distribution of collisions along the Broadway corridor. As shown, the majority of the collisions occurred at intersections or in close proximity to intersections. The intersection of Naples Street and Broadway experienced the highest number of collisions during the 5‐year period, with 4 collisions over this period. The block with the greatest total collisions was Broadway from H Street to I Street, where 6 collisions were recorded. This segment is adjacent to the Chula Vista Center shopping center which has five access points to/from Broadway, likely attracting high volumes of vehicles and cyclists. Figure 3‐6 summarizes the “Primary Collision Factor Category” assigned to the collisions by the reporting law enforcement officer. The leading collision factor was attributed to riding on the wrong side of the road, representing 34% of all collisions, potentially indicating a need for increased education, and clarification of where cyclists should be riding along this corridor. Two collisions were categorized as violating the pedestrian right‐of‐way, potentially indicating the bicyclist was riding on the sidewalk due to discomfort mixing with traffic. Wrong Side of Road 34% Pedestrian Right of Way 6% Improper Turning 21% Automobile Right of Way 15% Traffic Signals and Signs 6% Other Hazardous Violation 15% Other Bicycle Violation 3% Source: SWITRS (2015); Chen Ryan Associates, 2015 Figure 3‐6 Primary Collision Factor Category (2009 – 2013) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20092010201120122013 To t a l Bi c y c l e ‐In v o l v e d Co l l i s i o n s Source: SWITRS (2015); Chen Ryan Associates, 2015 Figure 3‐7 Bicycle‐Involved Collisions by Year (2009 – 2013) 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 311 Page 32 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report Figure 3‐7 displays the total collisions by year. Collisions peaked in 2010 with 9 bicycle‐involved collisions and have steadily declined each year, with 5 collisions in 2013, the most recent year of available data. 3.10 Bicycle Counts Manual screenline bicycle counts, which record bicyclists passing a point along a segment, were performed at six locations along Broadway, between intersections, from 6/4/2015 – 6/11/2015 during the evening peak period (4:00 PM – 6:00 PM). Only bicyclists traveling along Broadway (north‐south) were counted. Weekday peak periods were chosen in an attempt to reflect utilitarian bicycle commuters. The following variables were recorded during the counts:  Location (traffic lane or on sidewalk)  Wrong way cycling (against the direction of traffic)  Gender Figure 3‐8 displays observed bicycle volumes at each of the six count locations. As shown, the greatest volumes were recorded in the northern portion of the study area, while the lowest volumes were recorded in the central portion. Appendix C includes the completed count sheets. Table 3‐4 summarizes the bicycle counts in greater detail. As shown, approximately 68% of cyclists were observed riding on the sidewalk, an indication that the majority of cyclists do not feel comfortable mixing with traffic along Broadway. Table 3-4 PM Peak Period Bicycle Counts (4PM-6PM) Count Location Traffic Lane Sidewalk Traffic Lane Wrong‐ Way Sidewalk Wrong‐ Way Male Female Total Observed Flower Street to E Street 8 (30%) 19 (70%) 1 10 24 3 27 H Street to I Street 8 (31%) 18 (69%) 0 9 23 3 26 Halsey Street to J Street 4 (57%) 3 (43%) 0 2 7 0 7 L Street to Arizona Street 5 (42%) 7 (58%) 0 6 12 0 12 Oxford Street to Palomar Street 5 (45%) 6 (55%) 0 5 11 0 11 Palomar Street to Anita Street 2 (13%) 14 (88%) 0 8 16 0 16 TOTAL 32 (32%) 67 (68%) 1 40 93 (94%) 6 (6%) 99 Source: Chen Ryan Associates, December 2015 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 312 7 16 11 12 26 27 Bike Lanes on BroadwayFeasibility Study Draft Report Figure 3-8 Broadway Bicycle Counts (June 2015) §¨¦5 ² 0 2,0001,000 Feet Source: Chen Ryan Associates (2015) C St F St L St Main St B r o a d w a y PM Peak Period Bicycle Counts 26 - 27 11 - 16 7 Palomar St Anita St Naples St Oxford St Moss St K St J St I St H St G St F St E St D St City ofChula Vista Counts conducted on a weekday between 4pm and 6pm.Only north-south movements along Broadway counted. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 313 Page 34 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report Interestingly, the three sites with the highest observed sidewalk cycling rates were found to include one site in each of the three curb‐to‐curb width categories:  88% sidewalk cycling rate – from Palomar Street to Anita Street (82’ curb‐to‐curb width)  70% sidewalk cycling rate – from Flower Street to E Street (70’ curb‐to‐curb width)  69% sidewalk cycling rate – from H Street to I Street (80’ curb‐to‐curb width) In total, across the six count sites, 43 cyclists were riding on the west side of Broadway, while 56 were seen riding on the east side during the 4PM‐6PM peak period. Only one of the 32 cyclists riding in the traffic lane was observed riding in the wrong direction, whereas 40 of the 67 cyclists riding on the sidewalk were observed riding in the wrong direction. Additionally, a significant gender discrepancy was observed, with 94% of cyclists identified as male. The findings related to sidewalk cycling and gender are strong indicators that the Broadway corridor is generally uninviting to the broader population and that bicycle facility improvements are needed. One of the count locations, Broadway from H Street to I Street, was previously counted in August 2010 in support of the City of Chula Vista’s 2011 Bicycle Master Plan. The count was performed during the same weekday peak period (4:00 PM to 6:00 PM), allowing for a simple volume and gender comparison. Table 3‐5 displays the comparison between the 2011 and 2015 count. As shown, volumes have grown from 19 cyclists in 2010 to 26 cyclists in 2015, a 37% increase. Males were by far the majority during both count periods. While a single count location provides a very small sample size for comparison, this demonstrates growth in cycling demand which is also exhibited in regional, state, and national trends. Table 3-5 H Street to I Street Count Comparison (2010 vs. 2015) Date/Time Counted Male Female Total Observed 8/31/2010 1600 – 1800 18 1 19 6/5/2015 1600 – 1800 23 3 26 Source: Chula Vista Bikeway Master Plan (2011); Chen Ryan Associates, (2015) 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 314 Page 35 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report 4.0 Alternative Development Draft alternative designs were developed for four segments along Broadway. The segments generally follow the varying curb‐to‐curb widths, with the exception of the northerly (C Street to F Street) segment, which was divided into two segments due to changing median characteristics. The segments and number of design alternatives developed include the following:  C Street to E Street – 3 alternatives  E Street to F Street – 2 alternatives  F Street to L Street – 2 alternatives  L Street to Main Street – 2 alternatives Each of the alternatives was designed taking into consideration the opportunities and limitations described in the previous chapter and public input. Additional emphasis was placed on maintaining the existing curb‐to‐curb widths in an effort to avoid potentially costly construction. Each of the design alternatives was presented during the second workshop series to solicit community input and identify the preferred alternative. 4.1 C Street to E Street Alternative Designs The following three alternative designs were developed for the C Street to E Street segment: C Street to E Street #1  5’ bike lanes with 3’ buffers  Two 11’ travel lanes in each direction  Continuous 10’ two‐way left‐turn lane  No on‐street parking on either side C Street to E Street #2  5’ bike lanes  Two 11’ travel lanes in each direction  4’ painted center median  8’ parking lane on east side; no on‐ street parking on west side 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 315 Page 36 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report C Street to E Street #3  5’ bike lanes with 3’ buffer  One 12’ travel lane in each direction  Continuous 14’ two‐way left‐turn lane  Two 8’ on‐street parking lanes 4.2 E Street to F Street Alternative Designs The following two alternative designs were developed for the E Street to F Street segment: E Street to F Street #1  5’ bike lanes  Two 11’ travel lanes in each direction  No median  Two 8’ on‐street parking lanes E Street to F Street #2  5’ bike lanes with 3’ buffer  One 12’ travel lane in each direction  Continuous 14’ two‐way left‐turn lane  Two 8’ on‐street parking lanes 4.3 F Street to L Street Alternative Designs The following two alternative designs were developed for the F Street to L Street segment: 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 316 Page 37 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report F Street to L Street #1  5’ bike lanes  Two 11’ travel lanes in each direction  Continuous 10’ two‐way left‐turn lane  Two 8’ on‐street parking lanes F Street to L Street #2  6’ bike lanes with 7’ buffer  One 12’ travel lane in each direction  Continuous 14’ two‐way left‐turn lane  Two 8’ on‐street parking lanes 4.4 L Street to Main Street Alternative Designs The following two alternative designs were developed for the L Street to Main Street segment: L Street to Main Street #1  5’ bike lanes with 4’ buffer  Two 11’ travel lanes in each direction  Existing 18’ wide raised median with left‐turn pockets  No on‐street parking L Street to Main Street #2  6’ bike lanes with 6’ buffer  One 12’ travel lane in each direction  Existing 18’ wide raised median with left‐turn pockets  Two 8’ on‐street parking lanes 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 317 Page 38 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report 5.0 Preferred Alternative Identification of the preferred alternative was largely based on the community input collected during the second workshop series, engineering feasibility, and City staff input. The preferred design takes into consideration many of the concerns voiced by community members and other stakeholders where feasible, such as separation from vehicular traffic provided by buffers, preservation of on‐street parking, and bike lane/bus stop interaction. The preferred alternative includes three different cross‐sections for accommodating bike lanes along Broadway, reflecting the varying curb‐to‐curb widths and traffic volumes. The preferred alternative striping plan is provided in Appendix D. The defining characteristics for the three sections are described in the following pages. This Chapter concludes with a summary of additional considerations. Note that Broadway is a truck route. Per MTS, the lanes need to be a minimum of 11 feet wide. 5.1 C Street to G Street The northerly segment, C Street to G Street, is the most constrained segment in terms of curb‐to‐ curb width (approximately 70’ between C Street and F Street). However, the relatively low traffic volumes (17,500 – 22,000 ADT) provide greater flexibility for the roadway configuration than offered by the other segments. A road diet is recommended for this segment, enabling the preservation of existing on‐street parking and the ability to provide buffered bicycle lanes. Figure 5‐1 displays the preferred alternative for the C Street to G Street segment. Note that this segment has been extended to G Street in order to transition between two lanes to four lanes north of G Street rather than at the G Street intersection. Figure 5‐1 C Street to G Street Preferred Alternative  5’ bike lane with 3’ buffer  Single 12’ vehicular travel lane in each direction  14’ two‐way left‐turn lane  Retain existing 8’ on‐street parking lanes 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 318 Page 39 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report 5.2 G Street to L Street The G Street to L Street segment is wide (approximately 80’) compared to the northern segment, and is not constrained by the presence of a physical median like the southerly segment. A standard bike lane can be implemented within the existing curb‐to‐curb while preserving on‐street parking and all vehicular lanes. Figure 5‐2 displays the preferred alternative for the G Street to L Street segment. Figure 5‐2 G Street to L Street Preferred Alternative  5’ bike lane - 5’ bike lane with 8’ buffer between H Street and I Street (northbound only)  Two 11’ vehicular travel lanes in each direction  10’ two‐way left‐turn lane  Retain existing 8’ on‐street parking lanes 5.3 L Street to Main Street The southerly segment, L Street to Main Street, has the widest curb‐to‐curb width (approximately 82’). However, this segment is constrained by an 18’ wide landscaped median with left‐turn pockets. On‐street parking is intermittent throughout this segment with parking prohibited along some blocks, such as the west side of Broadway from Oxford Street to Palomar Street. Buffered bike lanes are recommended for this segment, which can be implemented by prohibiting on‐street parking throughout the segment and narrowing vehicular travel lanes. The number of vehicular travel lanes and the existing landscaped median are retained. Figure 5‐3 displays the preferred alternative for the L Street to Main Street segment. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 319 Page 40 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report Figure 5‐3 L Street to Main Street Preferred Alternative  5’ bike lane with 4’ buffer  One 11’ inside (#1 lane) vehicular travel lane, one 12’ outside (#2 lane) vehicular travel lane in each direction  Retain existing median with left‐turn pockets  No on‐street parking 5.4 Additional Considerations Future Traffic Volumes Forecast traffic volumes were considered while evaluating the design alternatives. Specifically, the forecast volumes along Broadway from C Street to G Street were analyzed to determine whether removal of a travel lane in each direction would be feasible. In the Road Diet Informational Guide (November 2014), provided as Appendix E, the FHWA advises roadways with ADT of 20,000 vehicles per day (vpd) may be good candidates for a road diet. The document also references the wide range in thresholds established by other agencies, displayed as Figure 5‐4, notably Seattle set 25,000 as the ADT threshold. Figure 5‐5 displays the existing and forecast Broadway traffic volumes for the year 2035. Figure 5‐4 Road Diet Implementation Thresholds by Agency Source: FHWA (2014) 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 320 Anita St F St G St H St L St Moss St Naples S t Oxford S t Palomar S t I St J St K St C St 1 8 . 2 Main St Existing Curb-to-Curb Widths Existing & Forecast Vehicular Volumes 70’ Curb-to-Curb (4-Lane with Center Left-Turn Lane and Parking) 82’ Curb-to-Curb (4-Lane with 18’ raised median) 80’ Curb-to-Curb (4-Lane with Center Left-Turn Lane and Parking) 2 0 . 6 2 2 . 0 2 2 . 5 1 8 . 0 2 0 . 0 2 6 . 6 2 4 . 0 3 4 . 3 3 2 . 4 3 1 . 4 2 8 . 9 3 2 . 4 3 2 . 4 3 1 . 7 3 5 . 1 3 2 . 4 3 0 . 5 2 2 . 8 2 2 . 8 2 3 . 0 2 6 . 0 2 3 . 9 2 7 . 5 2 5 . 2 2 4 . 8 2 9 . 2 D St E St XX.X Average Daily Traffic Volumes (in thousands) Figure 5-5 Existing and Future Vehicular Volumes Bike Lanes on Broadway Source: City of Chula Vista Traffic Volumes Years 2009, 2013, 2014 & 2015; SANDAG Series 12 Regional Model Base Year 2008 Unadjusted Volume & Year 2035 Forecast Volume XX.X 2035 Forecast Traffic Volumes (in thousands) 0.75 Miles 1.5 Miles 1.7 Miles 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 321 Page 42 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report As shown, existing volumes along the C Street to G Street segment range from a low of 18,500 ADT to a high of 22,000 ADT, while forecast volumes range from a low of 18,000 ADT to a high of 26,600 ADT. The road diet may be in place for a limited time along the F Street to G Street segment, due to forecast vehicular volumes exceeding recommended thresholds. As volumes approach the 25,000 ADT threshold, the road diet may begin to negatively impact LOS, at which point intersection approach striping modifications may be considered in order to improve LOS at the intersections. Intersection Approaches Effective intersection approaches improve the visibility of cyclists to motorists and help facilitate predictable movements by cyclists and motorists. The preferred alternative design uses a “skip stripe” (or dashed stripe) at intersection approaches without a dedicated right‐turn lane, to indicate to right‐turning vehicles where it is permitted to cross into the bike lane. Green paint is recommended to fill the bike lane approximately 35’ prior to the intersection to reinforce the area as a bike lane and to indicate the appropriate location for cyclists to wait for the signal to change. Right‐Turn Lane Approaches Nine of the 16 signalized intersections along Broadway, between C Street and Main Street, have dedicated right‐turn lanes. Additionally, right‐turn lanes will be added at both Broadway intersection approaches to F Street. The presence of a dedicated right‐turn lane limits the roadway space available to repurpose for a bicycle facility. In some instances, there is adequate right‐of way to maintain both the bike lane and the right‐turn lane. At these locations, green paint is used on the bike lane approach to the right‐turn lane to alert cyclists a conflict point is approaching. The green paint is then discontinued and the bike lane includes a skip stripe to indicate to right‐turning vehicles the appropriate location to cross over the bike lane and enter the right‐turn lane. The skip stripe is discontinued approximately 35’ before the intersection and the bike lane is again filled with green paint to reinforce the area as a bike lane and to indicate the appropriate location for cyclists to wait for the signal to change. The method described above is recommended for the following intersection approaches:  C Street (northbound)  D Street (northbound)  E Street (southbound)  F Street (both directions)  I Street (northbound)  J Street (southbound) There is not sufficient width to maintain the bike lane and the right‐turn lane at three signalized intersections with a dedicated right‐turn lane(s). In these instances, the bike lane transitions to a shared bike lane/right‐turn lane. Sharrows are used to guide cyclists through the turn lane and up to the intersection. The shared lane is recommended for the right‐turn lane considering that turning lanes tend to have slower speeds and lower traffic volumes than the adjacent through 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 322 Page 43 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report lane. The shared bike lane/right‐turn lane method described above is recommended for the following intersection approaches:  H Street (both directions)  L Street (southbound)  Palomar Street (both directions) Bus Stops Maintaining efficient bus operations is critical to the transportation network. Bus stops are accommodated in the preferred alternative design by skip striping the bike lane approach to permit the bus to crossing over the bike lane. The location of bus stops are denoted on the preferred alternative striping plan by green boxes for reference. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 323 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report Appendix A Rails‐to‐Trails Conservancy Memo: Accommodating Bicycles on Broadway 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 324 Rails-to-Trails Conservancy Local Government Commission California Bicycle Coalition Memo September, 201 "1 To: Fro : Re: City of Chula Vista Healthy Transportation Network Accommodating Bicycles on Broadway Feasibility of Bicycle Lanes on Broadway Based on the field visit we conducted on August 9, 2011 and the discussions we held with City transportation staffdudng that visit, we believe that the City of Chula Vista will improve traffic safety and neighborhood livability by accommodating bicycling on Broadway. We recommend the installation of class 2 bicycle lanes from C Street to Main Street. This conclusion is based on the following observations: [] Bicyclists are already traveling along Broadway, both for the purpose of through travel as the parallel routes are not continuous, and to access the services and businesses that are located on Broadway; [] Traffic volumes and vehicle speeds are too high on Broadway for bicyclists to share the lane with motorists, and no bike lanes exist to provide a safer space for bicycling; [] Therefore, bicyclists most often ride on the sidewalks which presents serious hazards at intersections and degrades the pedestrian environment; The good news is that there is enough space on Broadway to accommodate Class 2 bicycle lanes without the added cost of shifting curbs or purchasing right-of-way. Blocks on the northern section of Broadway, from C Street to F Street, typically have 70 feet, curb-to-curb; blocks on the southern section of Brnadway, from F Street to Main Street typically have 80 feet, curb-to-curb. We believe that a customized plan that takes into account the available space, curb-to-curb, as well as the varying need for parking and/or two-way left-turn lanes along different sections of Broadway can be developed to provide a continuous Class 2 bicycle lane in each direction Broadway. On the sections of Broadway that currently have 70 feet curb-to-curb, the bicycle lanes will only fit if parking on one side of the street or the two-way lefi-turn lane is dropped. The City will need to evaluate the tradeoffs between these two strategies. Although it is often desirable to provide on street parking to support local businesses, the Broadway corridor appears to have sufficient off.. street parking that eliminating it on some blocks should be possible without negative impacts. If parking is eliminated on one side of the street the lane widths would be as follows: 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 325 2 [] One 6-foot bicycle lane (adjacent to curb), two t0-foot travel lanes, one 10-foot two-way, left turn lane, one 10-foot lane, one 11 -foot travel lane, one 6-font bicycle lane and one 7-foot parking lane as shown below. 16, I,o,l,0,110110,111,1617, If the two-way left turn lane is eliminated, the lane widths would be as follows: [] Two 7-foot parking lanes, two 6-foot bicycle lanes, four 1 l-foot travel lanes as shown below, I 7,1 .1 11, I 11. I ,1, Ill, 16.17,1 On the sections of Broadway that currently have 80 feet curb-to-curb, bicycle lanes will fit without changing the lane configuration except for narrowing the lanes, as follows: [] Two 7-foot parking lanes, two 6-foot bicycle lanes, four 11-foot travel lanes, one 10-foot two way left turn lane as shown below, 17,16, t I ,l, I to, I I ,,, Io, I ,,I On sections of Broadway that have more than 80 feet curb-to-curb, efforts should be made to add a raised median with turning pockets instead of a continuous two-way left turn lane to make it easier for pedestrians crossing the street and to better channelize turning movements. This is especially the case in sections of Broadway where the blocks are long and pedestrians are crossing midblock. On ttle section of Broadway between H Street and I Street, due to particularly high volume of through and turning traffic, it might make sense to eliminate the on-street parking adjacent to the Chula Vista Center mall and to provide a raised median with turning pockets where needed. Studies have found that raised medians can reduce pedestrian crashes by up to 40 percent. (See Zegeer, C., Stewart, J., and Huang, H., 0'E kczs ofA a/if-e,-/,ersus g/llt talff'ed Cross t.alks a¢ (Z11colzt/'olled Zocaliozzs." Ereczilive 5}/zziz/zaO, azzdRecoH#lzezzded ddeh zes, Report No. FH WA-RD-0 1-075, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, March 2002.) In the sections south of L Street that include a raised median with turning pockets, the City may need to eliminate on-street parking in some sections in order to fit in the bicycle lanes. When bicycle lanes are placed next to parked vehicles, a minimum of 13 feet should be provided for the parking lane and the bicycle lane. To encourage motorists to park close to the curb, the parking lane (or T markings) should be placed 7-feet from the curb, with a 6-foot bicycle lane. (Alternatively the parking lane can be set at 8 feet with a 5-font bicycle lane.) All parking lanes should be marked with a continuous line or with "T's that designate the individual parking spaces. IfT markings are used, a perpendicular line extending into the bicycle lane tour feet should be included (as shown in Appendix A, Slide #19 &the powerpoint presentation) to indicate to bicyclists where to ride to stay out of the door zone. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 326 3 Bicycle lanes at any intersections along Broadway that include a dedicated right-turn lane should shift to the left of the lane as per the California MUTCD, Chapter 9, so cyclists can travel straight and avoid "right-hook" crashes. As we discussed with staff during our visit, 10-foot lanes on urban arterials with speeds below 45 mph have not been found to reduce safety or capacity. A study on lane width safety by Potts, Harwood and Richard presented at the Transportation Research Board in 2007 stated that: "The research found no general indication that the use of lanes narrower than 3.6 m (12 ft) on urban and suburban arterials increases crash frequencies. This finding suggests that geometric design policies should provide substantial flexibility for use of lane widths narrower than 3.6 m (12 ft)." ("Relationship of Lane Width to Safety for Urban and Suburban Arterials," Ingrid B. Potts Principal Traffic Engineer Midwest Research Institute, Douglas W. Harwood Transportation Research Center Manager Midwest Research, Karen R. Richard StaffAnalyst Midwest Research Institute, TRB 2007 Annual Meeting, Transportation Research Record 2023.) Additional support for narrower lanes is included in the following studies: D Safe Streets, Livable Streets: A Positive Approach to Urban Roadside Design, A Dissertation Presented to The Academic Faculty by Eric Dumbaugh, In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for tile Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology December, 2005 [] Traffic Fatalities and Injuries: Are Reductions the Result of"Improvements" in Highway Design Standards? Robert B. Noland Centre for Transport Studies Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine London, SW7 2BU Phone: 011-44-207-594-6036 Fax: 011-44-207-594-6102 Email: r.noland@ic.ac.uk http://cts.cv.ic.ac.nk (TRB Presentation 2000) D The Effects of Transportation Corridors' Roadside Design Features on User Behavior and Safety, and Their Contributions to Health, Environmental Qnality, and Community Economic Vitality: a Literature Review, Elizabeth Macdonald, Rebecca Sanders, Paul Supawanich, University of California, Berkeley, University of California Transportation Center UCTC Research Paper No. 878 [] The Influence of Lane Widths on Safety and Capacity: A Summary of the Latest Findings Theodore Petritsch, P.E. PTOE Director of Transportation Services Sprinkle Consulting, Sprinkle Consulting Examples of cities that have accommodated bicycle lanes on multMane streets by narrowing down the vehicle travel lanes to 10 feet are included in Appendix B, "Accommodating Bike Lanes in Constrained Rights of Way" assembled by the Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals. Photographs of cities that have similar streets to Broadway with bicycle lanes are included in the presentation enclosed as Appendix A. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 327 4 Case Studies and Reports Showin Economic Benefits of Bicyclin Infrastructure Investments on Local Business 1. How Bike Lanes Can Boost the Economy: Recognizing the economic role of bikes: a study in Sydney, Australia http:sustainab ecitiesc ective.c m/bi -city/2425 /h w-bike-anes-can-b st-ec n my Research in 2007 by Alison Lee sought to identify the economic value of replacing car parking with bike parking in shopping strips. The case study in Lygon Street Carlton in Melbourne showed that cycling generates 3.6 times more expenditure. Even though a car user spends more per hour on average compared to a bike rider, the small area of public space required for bike parking suggests that each square metre allocated to bike parking generates $31 per hour, compared to $6 generated for each square metre used for a car parking space, with food/drink and clothing retailers benefiting the most from bike riders. 2. Bike Lanes, On-Street Parking and Business: A Study of Bloor Street in Toronto's Annex Neighbourhood www.cleanairpartnership.or /pdf/bike-lanes-parkinff.pd f From Conclusions/Recommendations section: This study set out to analyze the constraints and opportunities, including the economic impact of removing one lane of on-street parking, for installing a bike lane on Bloor Street throngh the Annex neigbbourhood. Based on the data, analysis and discussion, the evidence makes a strong case that Toronto should be looking to install a bike lane on tbis section of Bloor Street. The spending habits of cyclists, their relatively high mode share, and the minimal impact on parking all demonstrate that merchants in this area are unlikely to be negatively affected by reallocating on-street parking space to a bike lane. On the contrary, this change will likely increase commercial activity. 3. Bloor Street Follow-up Study - Bike Lanes, On-Street Parking and Business: Year 2 Report http://torontocat.ca/main/sites/all/files/BikeLanes Parkinz Business BloorWestVillage.pdf From Conclusions and Recommendations section: The data presented in this report indicate that in tbe Bloor West Village neighborhood there is both visitor/resident and merchant support for changes in street use allocation to anpport active transportation snch as installing a bike lane or widening sidewalks, and that the removal of half of the on-street parking to accommodate such changes would be unlikely to negatively impact commercial activity. From Conclusions and Recommendations section: The results of this study, combined with the results of the previous study in the Bloor Annex neighborhood, suggest that the assumption that reducing on-street parking to accommodate active transportation is "bad for business" may not be true for at least two different neighborhoods along the Bloor-Danforth corridor. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 328 5 4. Bike Corrals: Local Business Impacts, Benefits, and Attitudes From Bicyclists as Customers section: A concern of businesses, specifically regarding the loss of valuable on-street auto parking, is that they will lose customers who drive without gaining customers who travel by other modes. Despite this commonly held logic, 40 percent &all businesses estimate that they have seen an increase or strong increase in customers who are bicyclists. Furthermore, businesses in this study, on average, perceive that one out of every four (24.8 percent) of their customers are bicyclists. From Demand for Parking section: The bike corrals increase the parking capacity of the street by 400 to 800 percent, per corral, by removing 1 to 2 auto parking spaces and replacing them with room for 10 to 20 bicycles. With average persons per vehicle steadily declining, reaching a low of 1.08 in 2000, the bike corrals are often meeting the same or similar demand as the auto parking it replaced. This is true even when current existing conditions at some corrals average just one or two parked bikes at a time. The 400 to 800 percent increase in parking capacity benefits business by allowing more potential customers to park adjacent to their establishment. \\Western\rtc files\HTN\Technical Assistance Workshops 201 l\City ofChula Vista\Chula Vista TA Post-Mtu docs\PDX Bike Corral Study.pdf 5. Shoppers and How They Travel http:www sustrans.r .uk/assets es iveab e%2 neighb ur ds/Sh ppers%2 inf %2 sheet%2 0-%20LN02.pdf This study by Sustrans (United Kingdom) focused on the City of Bristol to determine how customers traveled to shop. The study found that retailers overestimate the importance of the car, overestimate how far their customers travel, and underestimate how many shops each customer visits. These findings have real significance for business planning- as well as land use and transport. Typically, retailers advocate for more car access and parking, and tend to resist measures to promote walking, cycling and public transport use, yet this study suggests that the opposite would be more beneficial to businesses. Shoppers' choice of travel modes in Bristol study 55% I I10% 13% Actual mode of customer travel R 22% 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 329 6 Education for Motorists and Bicyclists - Share the Road Campaigns As you proceed with implementing changes on Broadway, it will be important to educate the community - motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists - about how to safely and legally share the road. Below are some good Share the Road program descriptions as well as some promising statistics on the impact of these programs in tandem with bicycle infrastructure improvements. 1. Marin County Bike Coalition (MCBC) The MCBC operates a fairly extensive Share the Road campaign, and has extensively documented their efforts on their webpage: Share the Road paae. The purpose of their campaign is "educating bicyclists and motorists to share the road courteously and safely." Their page includes data about the success of tbeir program, including this: "a positive piece of data from the California Highway Patrol's Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWTRS) shows that Marin County bike and car crashes declined by 34% over the past I0 years, while bicycle commuting has simultaneously increased by 66%. " The Marin County Bicycle Coalition's efforts continue to help make the road safer, and your financial support and volunteerism through attending public meetings, makes a big difference. Through our collaborative efforts with law enforcement and public works departments we have raised awareness and changed the physical environment to make our roads safer for bicycle riding. Each time we secure new bike lanes, Complete Streets policies, fiscal support for non-motorized transportation projects, etc. we are helping to make the roads safer for bicycle commuters and recreational riders in Marin County. MCBC's current program consists of three main components: Check o , Basic Street Skills classes and Ridin with Youth workshops. As of December 2008 fonding for these programs is provided by the Non-motorized Transportation Pilot Program, administered by WalkBikeMarin. Additional partners for this program are Marin General Hospital and Marin County Law Enforcement. CHECKPOINT program: Local law enforcement agencies and MCBC team up for the Checkpoints to show their united support of reducing road rage and increasing traffic safety for motorists and cyclists. Uniformed officers and MCBC volunteers provide Share the Road flyers to motorists and cyclists that pass through each Checkpoint. The flyers contain California Vehicle Code information, Codes of Conduct for bicyclists and motorists to insure their safety and foster respect for each other and additional safety tips to prevent road rage. http://www.marinbike.ore./Campai ns/ShareTheRoad/lndex.shtml 2. Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center This webpage contains case studies of Bike/Ped Safety Campaigns from around the country. For example, "Share the Road for a Healthy Maine" details their Share the Road Campaign materials developed for TV ads, radio spots, etc. Although surveys to glean the results were inconclusive, anecdotal evidence suggests positive impacts. http://www.bicyclin info.oreJeducation/case-studies.cfm 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 330 7 RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED AFTER OUR FIELD VISIT QUESTION #1: How is tile pavement maintained under bike corrals? (Tile pavement will probably be subject to less stress since vehicles will not be using it, but we would probably want to include this pavement in an overlay or seal of the street.) We don't have this information, but you could find out by contacting someone in the Portland program. Tile contact person listed on the website is: Sarah Figliozzi, City of Portland Bureau of Transportation; sarah.figliozzi at portlandoregon.gnv You'll find a lot &information about the Portland Bicycle Corral Program here: http://www.portlandonline.com/transportation/index.cfm?a=250076&c=34813 QUESTION #2: Where would be the best locations to use colored bike lanes? There is no standard yet for how and where to use colored bike lanes. A good place to start is in conflict zones: places where tbe lanes cross a lane of traffic where you want to give motorists an extra reminder to look out for bikes. This issue is addressed in the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide (more on NACTO in the response to question #3 below): http://nacto.oruYcities-for-cyclin u/desi n-uide/bikewav-sinin g-markinu/colored-bike-lanes/ QUESTION #3: How do municipalities deal with liability issues for innovative treatments, since they have not yet been accepted into the MUTCD? Our understanding is that if the treatment is done with approval from FHWA as an experimental treatment, the liability is no different than any other transportation facility; you should confirm this with FHWA. In our interviews with several communities using experimental treatments, they indicated the process to get FHWA approval was fairly straightforward and not onerous. Here's a web page with more info: http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/cnndexper.htm This chart on the status of various FHWA experiments might also be helpful: http://www.flawa.dot.ov/environment/bikeped/mutcd bike.htm A good resource for cities that are trying new approaches to bicycling is the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO), which recently produced an Urban Bikeway Design Guide, "a collection of 21 innovative bikeway treatments designed to provide practitioners with a larger set &design solutions that go well beyond existing design guides and manuals to help promote safe bicycling." You can view the Guide here: http://nacto.or cities-for cvclin g/desi n-guide/ The following language from the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide is instructive: "It is important to note that many urban situations are complex; treatments must be tailored to the individual situation. Good engineering judgment based on deep knowledge of bicycle transportation should be a part of bikeway design. Decisions should be thoroughly documented. To assist with this, the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide links to companion reference material and studies." 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 331 {)i ,5i ;;z i , t ,i 2._ 8 There is a chapter on liability in the ITE's "Traffic Calming State of the Practice" Guide, which makes it clear how cities can protect themselves against liability. The Guide indicates that fears of litigation are often overblown: http:llwww.ite.or traffic/tcsop/Chapter6.pdf CONCLUSION We appreciate the opportunity to meet all of you and applaud your interest in making your city more bicycle-friendly. We hope that the Healthy Transportation Network's Technical Assistance Grant was useful to you. We would appreciate your feedback, which will help us continue to improve our program. If you can take a few minutes to respond to the following questions, we'd really appreciate it. You can email your response to Laura Cohen at Rails-to-Trails Conservancy, l. Overall, was the Technical Assistance consultation helpful? Please rate on a scale of 1-5 with 5 = extremely helpful; 1 = not helpful at all 2. What was most helpful to you? 3. Do you have any suggestions for improving our program? 4. Would you recommend this resource to others? 5. Do you anticipate that the Technical Assistance consultation will enable you to move forward with some element of your bicycle or pedestrian plans? If so, please specify. If you should need further technical assistance from the Healthy Transportation Network, we would be happy to talk to you about a fee-for-service arrangement, Please contact any one of us. Good luck, and thank you for hosting the Healthy Transportation Network staff. Laura Cohen, Western Region Director, Rails-to-Trails Conservancy 415-814-1100; laura@railstotrails.org Paul Zykofsky, Director, Center for Livable Communities, Local Government Commission 916-448-1198, ext. 317; pzykofskv@l c.or ; Dave Snyder, Executive Director, California Bicycle Coalition 415-431-2453; dave(calbike.or APPENDICES: A - Pdf of powerpoint presentation given by HTN staff for Chula Vista field visit, August 10, 2011 (includes slides from "Economic Effects of Traffic Calming on Urban Small Businesses" by Emily Drennen) B - Pdf of"Accommodating Bike Lanes in Constrained Rights-of-Way" prepared by Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals (APBP) 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 332 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report Appendix B Parcel Addresses Potentially Impacted by On‐Street Parking Loss 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 333 Broadway Businesses Potentially Impacted by Loss of On‐Street Parking Segment Number Parcel No. Address Phone Business Type 1: C St ‐ F St 1 5650401500 48 Broadway (619) 422‐5882 Cleaners 2 5650600500 76 Broadway (619) 425‐5880 Awnings 3 5651623100 110 Broadway (619) 946‐4102 Flooring 4 5651623000 118 Broadway (619) 476‐7277 Auto Repair 5 5651622100 120 Broadway (619) 426‐2797 Auto Repair 6 5651702300 131 Broadway (619) 410‐1869 Wholesale Fitness 7 5651621800 132 Broadway (619) 585‐4748 Computer Repair 8 5651621800 134 Broadway (619) 425‐3006 The Nails Stop 9 5651621800 136 Broadway (619) 427‐4247 Barber 10 5670411500 245 Broadway (619) 691‐8341 Florist 11 5670321700 246 Broadway (619) 425‐3536 Pawn Shop 12 5670411500 247 Broadway (619) 420‐0824 Bar 13 5670530200 259 Broadway (619) 426‐9423 Dance Studio 14 5670530300 261/263 Broadway (619) 691‐1657 Leather Goods 15 5670530400 265 Broadway (619) 476‐1338 Auto Glass 16 5670530400 265 1/2 Broadway (619) 407‐4180 Media Services 17 5670531200 273 Broadway (619) 585‐3119 Auto Repair 18 5670530700 277 Broadway (619) 427‐0348 Furniture 19 5670531300 281 Broadway n/a Believed to be Out of business 20 5670531000 283 Broadway (619) 585‐8122 Tattoo 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 334 Broadway Businesses Potentially Impacted by Loss of On‐Street Parking Segment Number Parcel No. Address Phone Business Type 2: F St ‐ L St 21 5670902300 380 Broadway n/a Believed to be Out of business 22 5672000900 408 Broadway (619) 425‐1966 Tax Services 23 5672001300 424 Broadway (619) 961‐0408 Video Game Store 24 5672001300 428 Broadway (619) 420‐7090 Land Surveyor 25 5710501100 568 Broadway (619) 425‐2660 Furniture 26 5711230800 632 Broadway (619) 585‐8128 Auto Repair 27 5720803100 633 Broadway (619) 271‐2846 Barber 28 5720803100 635 Broadway (619) 425‐1823 Restaurant 29 5720803000 639 Broadway (619) 407‐4338 Mattress Store 30 5721310100 667 Broadway n/a Believed to be Out of business 31 5721310200 669 Broadway (619) 564‐4264 Fabric Store 32 5721310300 671 Broadway (619) 585‐1352 Restaurant 33 5721312100 679 Broadway n/a Believed to be Out of business 34 5721312100 681 Broadway (619) 737‐5975 Salon 35 5721312000 683 Broadway n/a Believed to be Out of business 36 5721803300 725 Broadway (619) 476‐3470 Bar 37 5722705100 801 Broadway (619) 585‐3115 Auto Repair 3: L St ‐ Main St 38 6180211300 924 Broadway (619) 691‐8325 Auto Repair 39 6181520400 1077 Broadway (619) 476‐2231 A1 Auto Body and Paint 40 6220913200 1510 Broadway (619) 427‐6785 Auto Repair 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 335 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report Appendix C Bicycle Count Sheets 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 336 l+ c.,+ • + .+t::, +2. ..,t+ .D. ++--. J J ,../. X i J J <:3 J J -'X 4:: J '+x l+;,c. J ..K: J "A J -+,¢ OU O I']. J "A t J ;,< J X J t t J 0=+ -,+ ss-:m +o+" ct; r f 2 m 0 rea 1> 2 ,+ ca+ q + 0 + g g. o .0 .e < ca o >a +-<+ 2016-09-20 Agenda PacketPage 337 y J rJ IX C-j C F- CO Z¢D C9 I C q L ¢D J 9>F- ! 0 0 ID Co I -/1 0 - . ft ==>S" c S p 2016-09-20 Agenda PacketPage 338 3 v z J O J J f f J J O u, J J G z J J P J J o J J J CDr' CD C O r" C--3D C3 O3 D Ill "TI *' C- 2016-09-20 Agenda PacketPage 339 f f f t,J F -J ¢--/. f F-' _.....k.._._ / / / / / / y. / X r r m 3 D 0 C'J co rr- 0 v 6 c t a o o '.,1 2016-09-20 Agenda PacketPage 340 /ff G / i[ J J f // f <3 / c / J C] . oa 9 _o- . --I o 0 Q" r" 2016-09-20 Agenda PacketPage 341 / J / / / J f / G / / / / f / / / / rJ o I / J / 13) 6-n N"Ns" o . m . r- . " il =. gl f 2016-09-20 Agenda PacketPage 342 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report Appendix D Preferred Alternative Striping Plan 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 343 C STREET SEA VALE STREET MCINTOSH STREET BR O A D W A Y FLOWER STREET D STREET BR O A D W A Y CI T Y O F C H U L A V I S T A ENGINEERING DEPARTMENTMATCHLINE MATCHLINE MATCHLINESEE SHEET 2 SEE ABOVE RIGHT SEE BELOW LEFT CASSELMAN STREET CHULA VISTA STREET 5' 12 ' 12 ' 9' 11 ' 12 ' 6' 20 0 ' S H I F T I N G T A P E R 11 ' A A' 12'14'12'8'5'3'8'5'3' 12 ' 14 ' 12 ' 8' 5' 3' 8' 5' 3' 12'14'12' 8' 5' 3' 8' 5' 3' 12 ' 14 ' 12 ' 8' 5' 8' 5' 3' 20 0 ' S H I F T I N G T A P E R SE C T I O N A - A ' 5' 8 ' 35 ' 35 ' 12 ' 12 ' 3' 8' 3 ' 5' 7' 7 ' BI K E L A N E S O N B R O A D W A Y - A L T E R N A T I V E 3 ST R I P I N G P L A N F O R 20 1 6 - 0 9 - 2 0 Ag e n d a Pa c k e t Page 344 E STREET BR O A D W A Y F STREET BR O A D W A Y DAVIDSON STREET CI T Y O F C H U L A V I S T A ENGINEERING DEPARTMENTMATCHLINE MATCHLINE MATCHLINESEE SHEET 3 SEE ABOVE RIGHT SEE BELOW LEFT MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 1 12 ' 6' 15 0 ' S H I F T I N G T A P E R 15 0 ' S H I F T I N G T A P E R C C' A A' SE C T I O N A - A ' 12 ' 14 ' 12 ' 8' 5' 3' 6' 10' 12'14'12'8'5'3'8'5'3' 12 ' 14 ' 12 ' 8' 5' 3' 8' 5' 3' 12 ' 14 ' 12 ' 8' 5' 3' 8' 5' 3' 11 ' SE C T I O N A - A ' 5' 8 ' 35 ' 35 ' 12 ' 12 ' 3' 8' 3 ' 5' 12 ' 14 ' 12 ' 12'14'12'8'6'7'8'6'7' SE C T I O N B - B ' 5' 8 ' 35 ' 35 ' 12 ' 12 ' 3' 8' 3 ' 5' 7' 8' 40 ' 40 ' SE C T I O N C - C ' 6' 8' 6' 7' 12 ' 1 2 ' B B' 7' 7 ' 7' 7 ' 7' 7 ' 15 ' 12 ' 11 ' 5' VAR 6' BI K E L A N E S O N B R O A D W A Y - A L T E R N A T I V E 3 ST R I P I N G P L A N F O R 8' 5' 3' 6' 10' 12 ' 14 ' 12 ' 11 ' 6' 10'5' 6'10' 24' 20 1 6 - 0 9 - 2 0 Ag e n d a Pa c k e t Page 345 VANCE STREET OTIS STREET BR O A D W A Y G STREET PARK WAY BR O A D W A Y CI T Y O F C H U L A V I S T A ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT BI K E L A N E S O N B R O A D W A Y - A L T E R N A T I V E 3 ST R I P I N G P L A N F O R ROOSEVELT STREET MATCHLINE MATCHLINE MATCHLINESEE SHEET 4 SEE ABOVE RIGHT SEE BELOW LEFT 11'11'10' 13 ' 9' 11 ' 10 ' 11 ' 11 ' 11 ' 11 ' 10 ' 10'10'10'10'9'12'10'6' 5'5' 20 0 ' S H I F T I N G T A P E R 20 0 ' S H I F T I N G T A P E R 11 ' 1 1 ' 11 ' 1 1 ' 8' 5' 5 ' 40 ' 40 ' SE C T I O N C - C ' 5' 5' 8' 8'5' 8' 5' 8' 5' 8' 5' 8' 5' 11 ' MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 2 C C' 11 ' 8' 5' 8' 6' 7' 10 ' 12 ' 14 ' 12 ' 8' 6' 7' 8' 6' 7' 12 ' 8' 22 ' 5'11'11' 30 0 ' S H I F T I N G T A P E R 12 ' 12 ' 12 ' 14 ' 12 ' 8' 5' 8' 6' 7' 12 ' 11 ' 11 ' 12 ' 11 ' 11 ' 11 ' 13 ' 12 ' 10 ' 15 0 ' S H I F T I N G T A P E R 20 1 6 - 0 9 - 2 0 Ag e n d a Pa c k e t Page 346 H STREET BR O A D W A Y HALSEY STREET I STREET BR O A D W A Y MATCHLINE STA MATCHLINE STA MATCHLINE STA SEE SHEET 5 SEE ABOVE RIGHT SEE BELOW LEFT MATCHLINE STA SEE SHEET 3 11 ' 11 ' 11 ' 11 ' 10 ' 8'8' 11'11'11'11'10'11'11'11'11'10' 11 ' 11 ' 11 ' 11 ' 10 ' 5' CI T Y O F C H U L A V I S T A ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 10 ' 10 ' 10 ' 10 ' 9' 12 ' 10 ' 10 ' 10 ' 10 ' 11 ' 11 ' 9' 12 ' 11 ' 11 ' 11 ' 11 ' 10 ' 4' 9' 6' 13' 13' 9' 33 0 ' S H I F T I N G T A P E R 33 0 ' S H I F T I N G T A P E R C C' 11 ' 1 1 ' 11 ' 1 1 ' 8' 5' 5 ' 40 ' 40 ' SE C T I O N C - C ' 5' 5' 8' 5' 8'5' 5' 8'5' 8' 5' 8' 5' 8' 5' 7' 6' 8' 5' 8'5' BI K E L A N E S O N B R O A D W A Y - A L T E R N A T I V E 3 ST R I P I N G P L A N F O R 20 1 6 - 0 9 - 2 0 Ag e n d a Pa c k e t Page 347 J STREET BR O A D W A Y K STREET BR O A D W A Y MATCHLINE MATCHLINE MATCHLINESEE SHEET 6 SEE ABOVE RIGHT SEE BELOW LEFT MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 4 11 ' 11 ' 11 ' 11 ' 10 ' 8'8' 11 ' 11 ' 11 ' 11 ' 10 ' 11'11'11'11'10'11'11'11'11'10' CI T Y O F C H U L A V I S T A ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 4' 9' C C' 11 ' 1 1 ' 11 ' 1 1 ' 8' 5' 5 ' 40 ' 40 ' SE C T I O N C - C ' 5' 5' 8' 5'5' 8'8' 5'5' 5' 8'8' 5'5' 8'8'5'5' BI K E L A N E S O N B R O A D W A Y - A L T E R N A T I V E 3 ST R I P I N G P L A N F O R 20 1 6 - 0 9 - 2 0 Ag e n d a Pa c k e t Page 348 L STREET SIERRA WAY BR O A D W A Y MOSS STREET ARIZONA STREET MOSS STREET ARIZONA STREET BR O A D W A Y MATCHLINE MATCHLINE MATCHLINESEE SHEET 7 SEE ABOVE RIGHT SEE BELOW LEFT MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 5 11 ' 11 ' 11 ' 11 ' 10 ' 11 ' 11 ' 12 ' 12 ' 10 ' 5' 11'13'11'12'12'5'5'4'4' 11 ' 11 ' 12 ' 12 ' 5' 4'4' 5' CI T Y O F C H U L A V I S T A ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 9' 13 ' 13 ' 13'11'11'12'12' 5' 4' 4' 5' 36 0 ' S H I F T I N G T A P E R 36 0 ' S H I F T I N G T A P E R D D' 11 ' 9 ' 12 ' 4' 5' 1 1 ' 1 2 ' 4 ' 5 ' 9' 41 ' 41 ' SE C T I O N D - D ' C C' 11 ' 1 1 ' 11 ' 1 1 ' 8' 5' 5 ' 40 ' 40 ' SE C T I O N C - C ' 5' 5' 8' 8'8' 5'5' 6' 11 ' 11 ' 11 ' 11 ' 10 ' 8'8' 5'5' 11'13'11'12'12' BI K E L A N E S O N B R O A D W A Y - A L T E R N A T I V E 3 ST R I P I N G P L A N F O R 20 1 6 - 0 9 - 2 0 Ag e n d a Pa c k e t Page 349 CRESTED BUTTE STREET CRESTED BUTTE STREET BR O A D W A Y NAPLES STREET NAPLES STREET BR O A D W A Y MATCHLINE MATCHLINE MATCHLINESEE SHEET 8 SEE ABOVE RIGHT SEE BELOW LEFT MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 6 11 ' 13 ' 11 ' 12 ' 12 ' 5' 4' 4' 11 ' 13 ' 11 ' 12 ' 12 ' 5' 4' 4' 11'11'12'12'5'4'4'11'11'12'12'5'4'4' 5' 5'5' 5' CI T Y O F C H U L A V I S T A ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 13 ' 13 ' 13' 13 ' 13 ' 13 ' 11 ' 9 ' 12 ' 4' 5' 1 1 ' 1 2 ' 4 ' 5 ' 9' 41 ' 41 ' SE C T I O N D - D ' D D' BI K E L A N E S O N B R O A D W A Y - A L T E R N A T I V E 3 ST R I P I N G P L A N F O R 20 1 6 - 0 9 - 2 0 Ag e n d a Pa c k e t Page 350 OXFORD STREET OXFORD STREET BR O A D W A Y PALOMAR STREET PALOMAR STREET BR O A D W A Y MATCHLINE MATCHLINE MATCHLINESEE SHEET 9 SEE ABOVE RIGHT SEE BELOW LEFT MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 7 11 ' 13 ' 11 ' 12 ' 12 ' 5' 4'4' 11 ' 13 ' 11 ' 12 ' 12 ' 5' 9' 4' 11'13'11'12'12'5'4'4'11'13'11'12'12' 5' 4' 4' 5' 5' 5' 5' CI T Y O F C H U L A V I S T A ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 13 ' 9' 10 ' 10 ' 10 ' 9' 10 ' 10 ' 12 ' 11 ' 11 ' 10 ' 10 ' 11 ' 12 ' 11 ' 9 ' 12 ' 4 ' 5 ' 11 ' 1 2 ' 4 ' 5 ' 9' 41 ' 41 ' SE C T I O N D - D ' D D' BI K E L A N E S O N B R O A D W A Y - A L T E R N A T I V E 3 ST R I P I N G P L A N F O R 20 1 6 - 0 9 - 2 0 Ag e n d a Pa c k e t Page 351 BR O A D W A Y ANITA S T R E E T ANITA S T R E E T BR O A D W A Y MATCHLINE MATCHLINE MATCHLINESEE SHEET 10 SEE ABOVE RIGHT SEE BELOW LEFT MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 8 11 ' 13 ' 11 ' 12 ' 12 ' 5' 4'4' 5' 11'13'11'12'12'5'4'4'5' CI T Y O F C H U L A V I S T A ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 13 ' 13 ' 13 ' 13 ' 11'11'12'12'5'4'4'5' 11 ' 9 ' 12 ' 4 ' 5 ' 11 ' 1 2 ' 4 ' 5 ' 9' 41 ' 41 ' SE C T I O N D - D ' D D' 11 ' 11 ' 12 ' 12 ' 5' 4' 4' 5' BI K E L A N E S O N B R O A D W A Y - A L T E R N A T I V E 3 ST R I P I N G P L A N F O R 20 1 6 - 0 9 - 2 0 Ag e n d a Pa c k e t Page 352 MAIN S T R E E T MAIN S T R E E T B R O A D W A Y MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 9 CI T Y O F C H U L A V I S T A ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 1 1 ' 1 1 ' 12 ' 12 ' 5' 4' 4' 5' 9' 1 4 ' BI K E L A N E S O N B R O A D W A Y - A L T E R N A T I V E 3 ST R I P I N G P L A N F O R 20 1 6 - 0 9 - 2 0 Ag e n d a Pa c k e t Page 353 Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study Final Report Appendix E FHWA Road Diet Informational Guide 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 354 www.safety.fhwa.dot.gov FHWA Safety Program Road Diet Informational Guide 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 355 Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 7. Author(s) 17. Key Words 19. Security Clasif. (of this report) Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized 20. Security Clasif. (of this page)21. No. of Pages21. Price 4. Title and Subtitle 15. Supplementary Notes 16. Abstract 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 5. Report Date 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) 13. Type of Report and Period Covered 6. Performing Organization Code 11. Contract or Grant No. 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 8. Performing Organization Report No. 18. Distribution Statement FHWA-SA-14-028 Road Diet Informational Guide A classic Road Diet converts an existing four-lane undivided roadway segment to a three-lane segment consisting of two through lanes and a center two-way left turn lane (TWLTL). A Road Diet improves safety by including a protected left-turn lane for mid-block left-turning motorists, reducing crossing distance for pedestrians, and reducing travel speeds that decrease crash severity. Additionally, the Road Diet provides an opportunity to allocate excess roadway width to other purposes, including bicycle lanes, on-street parking, or transit stops. This Informational Guide includes safety, operational, and quality of life con- siderations from research and practice, and guides readers through the decision-making process to determine if Road Diets are a good fit for a certain corridor. It also provides design guidance and encourages post-implementation evaluation. Leidos 11251 Roger Bacon Drive Reston, VA 20190 Subconsultants: Iowa State University, Sam Schwartz Engineering, University of Utah Federal Highway Administration Office of Safety 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE Washington, DC 20590 Keith Knapp, Brian Chandler, Jennifer Atkinson, Thomas Welch, Heather Rigdon, Richard Retting, Stacey Meekins, Eric Widstrand, and R.J. Porter. Road Diet, four-lane, undivided, three-lane, two-way-left- turn-lane, cross section, safety, operations, reconfiguration, queuing. No restrictions. Unclassified Unclassified 72 November 2014 HSA 2. Government Accession No.3. Recipient’s Catalog No. Informational Guide Book August 2011 to July 2014 Contract No. DTFH61-10-D-00024, Task Order No. T-12-004 Rebecca Crowe (rebecca.crowe@dot.gov), Office of Safety Technologies (http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/), served as the Techni- cal Manager for the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The following FHWA staff members contributed as technical working group members, reviewers and/or provided input or feedback to the project at various stages: Peter Eun, David Morena, Tamara Redmond, and Jeff Shaw. N/A 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 356 Acknowledgements Many State and local agencies made significant contributions to this project. Special thanks to the following: Location Contributors Chicago Nathan Roseberry, T.Y. Lin International Des Moines, IA Mark Parrington, Snyder and Associates Jennifer Bohac and Mike Ring, City of Des Moines, Iowa New Hampton, IA David Little, Iowa DOT City of New Hampton Police Department Manchester, IA Tim Vick, City of Manchester Ryan Wicks, TeKippe Engineering Waterloo, IA Eric Thorson and Dennis Gentz, City of Waterloo Las Vegas, Nevada OC White, City of Las Vegas Los Angeles, CA Tim Fremaux and Pauline Chan, LADOT Bike Group Pasadena, CA Mike Bagheri, Pasadena DOT Santa Monica, CA Sam Morrissey, City of Santa Monica Grand Rapids, MI Genesee County, MI Lansing, MI Dave Morena and Andrea Dewey, FHWA Tracie Leix and Mike Premo, Michigan DOT Christopher Zull, City of Grand Rapids Carissa McQuiston, Michigan DOT Derek Bradshaw and Jason Nordberg, Genesee County Metropolitan Planning Commission Ken Johnson, Genesee County Road Commission Jill Bauer, City of Flint Tom Svrcek, City of Swartz Creek Andy Kilpatrick, City of Lansing New York City Ryan Russo, New York City DOT Ann Marie Doherty, New York City DOT Seattle, Washington Dongho Chang and Brian Dougherty, City of Seattle Reston and Dunn Loring Randy Dittberner, Virginia DOT Cover Photo Credits Left: Randy Dittberner, Virginia Department of Transportation Upper Right: City of Seattle Lower Right: Virginia Department of Transportation 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 357 ii Table of Contents Executive Summary .........................................................................................................1 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................3 1.1. What is a Road Diet? ..................................................................................................................................3 1.2 History of Road Diets .................................................................................................................................5 1.2.1 History of Road Diet Installations .........................................................................................5 1.2.2 History of Road Diet Safety Evaluations ...........................................................................5 1.3 Purpose and Objectives of the Informational Guide .........................................................6 1.4 Organization of the Guide ....................................................................................................................6 2 Why Consider a Road Diet? ......................................................................................7 2.1 Benefits of Road Diets...............................................................................................................................7 2.1.1 Im proved Safety ..............................................................................................................................7 2.1.2 Operational Benefits ....................................................................................................................9 2.1.3 Pedestrian and Bicyclist Benefits .......................................................................................9 2.1.4 Livability Benefits .........................................................................................................................10 2.2 Synergies and Trade-offs.......................................................................................................................10 3 Road Diet Feasibility Determination ...................................................................13 3.1 Safety Factors ..............................................................................................................................................13 3.2 Context Sensitive Solutions and Complete Streets .............................................................14 3.3 Operational Factors ..................................................................................................................................15 3.3.1 De Facto Three-Lane Roadway Operation ..................................................................15 3.3.2 Speed ...................................................................................................................................................15 3.3.3 Level of Service (LOS) .................................................................................................................15 3.3.4 Quality of Service ........................................................................................................................16 3.3.5 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) ..................................................................................................17 3.3.6 Peak Hour and Peak Direction ...........................................................................................17 3.3.7 Turning Volumes and Patterns ............................................................................................18 3.3.8 Frequently Stopping and Slow-Moving Vehicles ....................................................18 3.4 Bicycles, Pedestrians, Transit, and Freight Considerations ...............................................19 3.4.1 Bicycle Considerations ............................................................................................................19 3.4.2 Pedestrian Considerations ...................................................................................................20 3.4.3 Transit Considerations .............................................................................................................20 3.4.4 Freight Considerations ...........................................................................................................21 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 358 iii Road Diet Informational Guide 3.5 Other Feasibility Determination Factors ....................................................................................22 3.5.1 Right-of-Way Availability and Cost ....................................................................................22 3.5.2 Parallel Roadways .........................................................................................................................22 3.5.3 Parallel Parking ...............................................................................................................................23 3.5.4 At-Grade Railroad Crossings ..................................................................................................23 3.5.5 Public Outreach, Public Relations, and Political Considerations ....................23 3.6 Case Studies: Feasibility Determination Decision-making ...........................................24 3.7 Funding Road Diets ..................................................................................................................................28 4 Designing a Road Diet ...........................................................................................29 4.1 Geometric Design .....................................................................................................................................29 4.1.1 Road Function and Context ..................................................................................................29 4.1.2 Design Controls .............................................................................................................................30 4.1.3 Elements of Design .....................................................................................................................32 4.1.4 Cross Sectional Elements ........................................................................................................33 4.1.5 Intersection Design .....................................................................................................................37 4.2 Operational Design ..................................................................................................................................40 4.2.1 Cross-Section Allocation ..........................................................................................................40 4.2.2 Crossing Pedestrians ..................................................................................................................41 4.2.3 Intersection Control Changes ..............................................................................................41 4.2.4 Pavement Marking and Signing .........................................................................................42 4.2.5 Intersection Design Elements ..............................................................................................42 5 Determining if the Road Diet is Effective ...........................................................45 5.1 Safety Analysis of a Road Diet ............................................................................................................45 5.1.1 Da ta Needs .......................................................................................................................................45 5.1.2 Observational Before-and-After Studies of Road Diets .......................................46 5.1.3 Surrogate Measures of Safety for Road Diets .............................................................47 5.2 Operational Analysis ................................................................................................................................48 5.2.1 Analyzing Vehicle Operations ..............................................................................................48 5.2.2 Non-Motorized Operations ...................................................................................................49 5.2.3 Tools and Methods to Evaluate Impacts .......................................................................50 6 Conclusion .................................................................................................................51 Appendix A – Road Diet Safety Assessment Studies .............................................53 Appendix B – Feasibility Determination Factors, Characteristics, and Sample Evaluative Questions ......................................................59 References .....................................................................................................................62 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 359 iv List of Figures Figure 1. Road Diet .......................................................................................................................................................................................1 Figure 2. Typical Road Diet Basic Design.........................................................................................................................................3 Figure 3. Focus of Each Informational Guide Chapter ............................................................................................................6 Figure 4. Mid-Block Conflict Points for Four-Lane Undivided Roadway and Three-Lane Cross Section ......7 Figure 5. Crossing and Through Traffic Conflict Points at Intersections for a Four-Lane Undivided Roadway and a Three-Lane Cross Section ...............................................................................................................8 Figure 6. Major-Street Left-Turn Sight Distance for Four-Lane Undivided Roadway and Three-Lane Cross Section ....................................................................................................................................................8 Figure 7. Addition of a Bike Lane Creates a Buffer between Pedestrians and Moving Vehicles ..............9 Figure 8. Mid-block Pedestrian Refuge Island .............................................................................................................................9 Figure 9. Pedestrian Refuge Island on a Road Diet Corridor in Chicago ..................................................................10 Figure 10. Road Diet in Flint, Michigan, Central Business District ....................................................................................13 Figure 11. Four-lane Undivided Roadway Intersection Operating as a de facto Three-lane Cross Section ..................................................................................................................................................15 Figure 12. Road Diet Implementation Maximum Volume Thresholds by Agency ..............................................17 Figure 13. Bus Loading Zone in Seattle, Washington ..............................................................................................................18 Figure 14. Buffered Bicycle Lanes on Wabash Avenue in Chicago .................................................................................19 Figure 15. Pedestrians Buffered from Traffic in Reston, VA ...................................................................................................19 Figure 16. 55th Street in Chicago: Transit and Bicycles Share an Area at the Intersection (left); Transit Stop and Bicycle Lane (right); .........................................................................................................................20 Figure 17. City of Seattle Modeling Flow Chart for Road Diet Feasibility Determination ...............................25 Figure 18. Painted Buffer Between Through Lane and Bicycle Lane in Lansing, Michigan .........................26 Figure 19. Bicycle Lane on Rural 3-Lane Section, Lawyers Road, Reston, VA .........................................................34 Figure 20. Typical Bike Lane Illustration ...........................................................................................................................................35 Figure 21. Paired Parking Cross Sections (Adapted from AASHTO) ..............................................................................35 Figure 22. Example Parking Lane Transition at Intersection (Adapted from AASHTO, 2011) .........................36 Figure 23. Transition from 3-lane to 2-lane Cross Section, Oak Street, Merrifield, VA ........................................37 Figure 24. Offset Driveways Causing Conflict Points in the TWLTL ..............................................................................43 List of Tables Table 1. Problems Potentially Correctable by Road Diet Implementation ............................................................2 Table 2. Practitioner Interview Results Summary: Road Diet Installation Observations .............................12 Table 3. Road Diet Implementation Considerations by Agency ...............................................................................28 Table 4. Quantifiable Characteristics of Land User Contexts (NJDOT & PennDOT, 2008) .........................30 Table 5. Regional Arterial Design Matrix (NJDOT & PennDOT, 2008) .......................................................................31 Table 6. Maximum Allowable Travel Distance in TWLTL ................................................................................................38 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 360 v Road Diet Informational Guide Acronyms 3R Resurfacing, Restoration, and Rehabilitation AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials AADT Annual Average Daily Traffic ADT Average Daily Traffic CRF Crash Reduction Factor CSS Context Sensitive Solutions DOT Department of Transportation GCMPC Genesee County Metropolitan Planning Commission FDF Feasibility Determination Factor FHWA Federal Highway Administration HSM Highway Safety Manual ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers KTC Kentucky Transportation Center LOS Level of Service MPH Miles Per Hour MUTCD Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices NACTO National Association of City Transportation Officials NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research Program NHS National Highway System PDO Property Damage Only TCRP Transit Cooperative Research Program TRB Transportation Research Board TWLTL Two Way Left Turn Lane VPHPD Vehicles Per Hour Per Day VPD Vehicles Per Day 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 361 1 Executive Summary Four-lane undivided highways have a history of relatively high crash rates as traffic volumes increase and as the inside lane is shared by higher- speed through traffic and left-turning vehicles. One option for addressing this safety concern is a “Road Diet.” A Road Diet involves converting an existing four-lane undivided roadway segment to a three-lane segment consisting of two through lanes and a center two-way left-turn lane (TWLTL). The reduction of lanes allows the roadway cross section to be reallocated for other uses such as bike lanes, pedestrian refuge islands, transit stops, or parking (see Figure 1).1 Benefits of Road Diet installations may include: • An overall crash reduction of 19 to 47 percent. • Reduction of rear-end and left-turn crashes through the use of a dedicated left-turn lane. • Fewer lanes for pedestrians to cross and an opportunity to install pedestrian refuge islands. • The opportunity to install bicycle lanes when the cross-section width is reallocated. Figure 1. Road Diet Photo Credit: Virginia Department of Transportation Road Diet Definition Conversion of a four-lane undivided road to a three- lane undivided road made up of two through lanes and a center two-way-left- turn-lane. BEFORE AFTER 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 362 2 • Reduced right-angle crashes as side street motorists must cross only three lanes of traffic instead of four. • Traffic calming and reduced speed differential, which can decrease the number of crashes and reduce the severity of crashes if they occur. • The opportunity to allocate the “leftover” roadway width for other purposes, such as on-street parking or transit stops. • Encouraging a more community-focused, “Complete Streets” environment. • Simplifying road scanning and gap selection for motorists (especially older and younger drivers) making left turns from or onto the mainline. A Road Diet can be a low-cost safety solution, particularly in cases where only pavement marking modifications are required to make the traffic control change. In other cases, the Road Diet may be planned in conjunction with reconstruction or simple overlay projects, and the change in cross section allocation can be incorporated at no additional cost. Geometric and operational design features should be considered during the design of a Road Diet. Intersection turn lanes, traffic volume, signing, pavement markings, driveway density, transit routes and stops, and pedestrian and bicyclist facilities should be carefully considered and appropriately applied during the reconfiguration for appropriate Road Diet implementation.2 As with any roadway treatment, determining whether a Road Diet is the most appropriate alternative in a given situation requires data analysis and engineering judgment. Once installed, it is important to monitor the safety and operational effects of the roadway, and to make changes as necessary to maintain acceptable traffic flow and safety performance for all road users. Evaluation of Road Diets will provide practitioners the information needed to continue implementing reconfiguration projects in their jurisdictions. CategoryProblem Rationale Safety Rear-end crashes with left-turning traffic due to speed discrepancies Removing stopped vehicles attempting to turn left from the through lane could reduce rear-end crashes Sideswipe crashes due to lane changesEliminating the need to change lanes reduces sideswipe crashes Left-turn crashes due to negative offset left turns from the inside lanes Eliminating the negative offset between opposing left-turn vehicles and increasing available sight distance can reduce left-turn crashes Bicycle and pedestrian crashesBicycle lanes separate bicycles from traffic; pedestrians have fewer lanes to cross and can use a refuge area, if provided Operational Delays associated with left-turning traffic Separating left-turning traffic has been shown to reduce delays at signalized intersections Side street delays at unsignalized intersections Side-street traffic requires shorter gaps to complete movements due to the consolidation of left turns into one lane Bicycle operational delay due to shared lane with vehicles or sidewalk use Potential for including a bike lane eliminates such delays Other Bicycle and pedestrian accommodation due to lack of facilities Opportunity to provide appropriate or required facilities, increasing accessibility to non-motorized users Unattractive aesthetic Provisions can be made for traversable medians and other treatments Vehicles speeds discourage pedestrian activity Potential for more uniform speeds; opportunity to encourage pedestrian activity Adapted from Kentucky Transportation Center’s Guidelines for Road Diet Conversions3 Table 1. Problems Potentially Correctable by Road Diet Implementation 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 363 Figure 2. Typical Road Diet Basic Design Before After 3 1 Introduction Improving safety is a top priority for the U.S. Department of Transportation, and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) remains committed to reducing highway fatalities and serious injuries on our Nation's roadways through the use of proven safety countermeasures, including Road Diets. Four-lane, undivided highways experience a number of crash types as traffic volumes increase, including: • Rear-end and sideswipe crashes caused by speed differential between vehicles; • Sideswipe crashes caused by frequent and sudden lane changing between two through lanes; • Rear-end crashes caused by left-turning vehicles stopped in the inside travel lane; • Left-turn crashes caused by mainline left-turning motorists feeling pressure to depart the shared through/left lane by following motorists and making a poor gap judgment; • Angle crashes caused by side street traffic crossing four lanes to make a through movement across an intersection, or turning left across two lanes; • Bicycle crashes due to a lack of available space for bicyclists to ride comfortably; and • Pedestrian crashes due to the high number of lanes for pedestrians to cross with no refuge. As traffic volumes and turning movements (at intersections and driveways) increase, more and more four-lane, undivided roadways experience the above safety concerns. Additionally, as active transportation increases, communities desire more livable spaces, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and transit options. One solution that benefits all modes is a Road Diet. 1.1. What is a Road Diet? A Road Diet is generally described as “removing travel lanes from a roadway and utilizing the space for other uses and travel modes.” 4 This informational guide will focus on the most common Road Diet reconfiguration, which is the conversion of an undivided four lane roadway to a three-lane undivided roadway made up of two through lanes and a center two-way left-turn lane (TWLTL). The reduction of lanes allows the roadway cross section to be reallocated for other uses such as bike lanes, pedestrian refuge islands, transit uses, and/or parking (see Figure 2).5 Will a Road Diet Increase Costs? “We planned our Road Diet installation as part of the overlay, so there was no additional cost to the construction budget.” - Robert Rocchio, Managing Engineer, Traffic Management & Highway Safety, Rhode Island DOT 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 364 4 Other Roadway Reconfigurations In addition to four- to three-lane configurations, other roadway reconfigurations, such as those depicted below, can also provide safety benefits: 4-lane to 5-lane: In some cases it is necessary to keep two lanes in each direction for capacity purposes. Narrowing lane width to provide a TWLTL introduces the benefits of separating turning vehicles and reducing operating speeds. 2-lane to 3-lane: If a capacity expansion of an existing two-lane road is desired, in some cases a three-lane cross section can provide similar operational benefits to a four-lane cross section while maintaining the safety benefits of the three-lane configuration. 3-lane to 3-lane: In some cases practitioners could reduce the width of each lane instead of reducing the number of lanes. Converting an existing three-lane roadway to a three-lane cross section with narrowed lanes can accommodate bicycle lanes or parking, and provide some traffic calming benefit. 5-lane to 3-lane In some cases jurisdictions have reconfigured five-lane sections to three lanes, adding features such as diagonal parking and protected bicycle lanes with the extra cross section width. Other Combinations: Some cases may require allocating the cross section differently by providing unbalanced lane splits (e.g., two in one direction, one in the other), separated left turn lanes for opposite directions, or providing shoulders for other uses (e.g., parking, bicycle lanes, sidewalks). The basic concepts of Road Diets still apply, although in some cases there may be different safety and operational effects than with a classic 4-to-3 Road Diet. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 365 5 1.2 History of Road Diets The focus of roadway projects during the 1950s and 1960s was on system and capacity expansion, not contraction. Whenever and wherever traffic volumes on a section of road outgrew what a 2-lane road could accommodate efficiently, the next step in roadway design in most cases was to increase the cross-section to 4 lanes. No engineering guidance during that period encouraged consideration of a three-lane alternative. Consequently, four-lane roadways became the norm throughout the country. Some of these roadways accommodated high traffic volumes requiring four-lane cross-sections; but many accommodated much less traffic for which a smaller cross-section simply had not been considered. 1.2.1 History of Road Diet Installations Lane reduction projects have occurred for many years; they simply have not been recorded or studied. One of the first known installations of a Road Diet occurred in 1979 in Billings, Montana. Here, 17th Street West was converted from a four-lane undivided highway to three lanes (including a two-way left-turn lane, or TWLTL). The roadway width was 40 feet, and the average daily traffic (ADT) was approximately 10,000 vehicles. An unpublished report referenced in a number of previous studies indicated a reduction in crashes with no appreciable change to vehicle delay.6 Road Diets increased in popularity in the 1990s, with installations occurring in Iowa, Minnesota, and Montana, among many other states.7 In some instances the appreciation for Road Diets was shown first in urban areas, such as Seattle, Washington, and Portland, Oregon. More recently, FHWA deemed Road Diets and other roadway reconfigurations a “Proven Safety Countermeasure” and promoted it as a safety-focused alternative cross section to a four-lane undivided roadway. 1.2.2 History of Road Diet Safety Evaluations Numerous studies have examined the estimated safety effects of converting four-lane undivided roads to three-lane cross sections with TWLTLs. The majority of treatment sites and crash data in these studies come from California, Iowa, and Washington, with additional analysis of Road Diets in Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Minnesota, and New York. Several studies used the same, or virtually the same, treatment sites in Iowa. Average Daily Traffic (ADT) for treatment sites in these studies ranged from 2,000 to 26,000, with most sites having an ADT below 20,000. In the late 1970s, Nemeth conducted a research study focused on TWLTLs that included one field study location that was a four- lane undivided highway converted to three lanes in a commercial district. Results included a reduction in operating speed and increased delay.8 The safety analysis methods and the reliability of the findings vary widely. Some studies considered multiple treatment sites and used advanced statistical techniques such as the empirical Bayes methodology to estimate the change in total crashes and crash rates. Other studies were conducted using simple before-and-after analysis without controls, did not account for potential regression-to-the-mean effects, and examined crash data at a single treatment site for only several months following Road Diet implementation. Pawlovich, et al., (2005) conducted a Bayesian data analysis of 15 Iowa Road Diet treatment sites and 15 control sites over a 23- year period. Traffic volumes ranged from approximately 2,000 to 15,000 vehicles per day. The study concluded that a Road Diet produced a 25.2 percent reduction in crashes per mile of roadway and an 18.8 percent reduction in the crash rate.9 A study by Noyce et al. (2006) first analyzed data using traditional approaches, which involved a comparison of before-and-after crashes. Crash data were analyzed by yoked-pair comparison analysis and the empirical Bayes approach. The traditional before- and-after approach estimated a reduction in total crashes of approximately 42 percent. A yoked-pair comparison analysis found a 37 percent reduction in total crashes and a 46 percent reduction in property damage only (PDO) crashes (both statistically significant). The estimated reductions in crash rates (per vehicle mile traveled) were 47 percent for total crashes and 45 percent for PDO crashes (both statistically significant), and the empirical Bayes approach estimated a 44 percent reduction in total crashes. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 366 Chapter 2: Why consider a Road Diet? Chapter 3: Should a Road Diet be used here? Chapter 4: How do I design a Road Diet? Chapter 5: How do I know if the Road Diet is working? Figure 3. Focus of Each Informational Guide Chapter 6 In 2010, FHWA conducted an empirical Bayes evaluation of total crash frequency before-and-after Road Diet implementation. Results indicated a statistically significant reduction in crashes due to the Road Diet treatment in two separate data sets (one data set for 15 sites in Iowa and one set for 30 sites in California and Washington), as well as for the results of all 45 sites combined. The Iowa data indicate a 47 percent reduction in total crashes while the California and Washington data indicate a 19 percent decrease. Combining both data sets results in an estimated 29 percent reduction in total crashes.10 The FHWA report indicated that differences between the Iowa sites and those in California and Washington may be a function of traffic volumes and characteristics of the urban environments where the Road Diets were implemented. Annual average daily traffic (AADT) for the Iowa sites ranged from 3,718 to 13,908 and locations were predominately on U.S. or State routes passing through small towns; AADT for the sites in California and Washington ranged from 6,194 to 26,376 and were predominately on corridors in suburban environments that surrounded larger cities. Sites with lower crash modification factors (CMFs) generally had higher traffic volumes, suggesting the possibility of diminishing safety benefits as traffic volumes increase. The authors recommended that the choice of which CMF to use should be based on characteristics of the site being considered. If the proposed treatment site is more like the small-town Iowa sites, then the 47 percent reduction found in Iowa should be used. If the treatment site is part of a corridor in a suburban area of a larger city, then the 19 percent reduction should be used. If the proposed site matches neither of these site types, then the combined 29 percent reduction is most appropriate. Based on the history of safety studies presented in this section, installing a Road Diet can lead to an expected crash reduction of 19 to 47 percent. Variables affecting safety effectiveness include pre-installation crash history, installation details, traffic volumes, and the urban or rural nature of the corridor. Appendix A provides summaries of the key findings from Road Diet safety assessments and additional detail about the individual studies. 1.3 Purpose and Objectives of the Informational Guide The Road Diet Informational Guide provides safety, operational, and quality-of-life considerations from research and practice that may impact all users along a corridor – motorists, commercial vehicles, and non-motorized traffic. This document will guide readers through the decision-making process to determine if Road Diets are a good fit for a certain corridor. The guide will also discuss Road Diet feasibility, design, and post-implementation evaluation. 1.4 Organization of the Guide The Road Diet Informational Guide is organized in the following manner, as illustrated in Figure 3 and described below: Chapter 2 presents a high-level overview of how a Road Diet can improve safety and maintain operations for motorized and non-motorized road users along a corridor, enhance the quality of life and livability, and be implemented at a low cost. Chapter 3 takes an in-depth look at impacts that a Road Diet may have on safety and operations for motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit along a corridor. This chapter includes feasibility determination factors that assist practitioners with selecting corridors that may be candidates for Road Diets and presents guidance for discussing Road Diets with a community. Chapter 4 leads practitioners through the Road Diet design process. This chapter provides geometric design, operational design, and both Complete Street and system-wide considerations. The intent of this chapter is to walk a practitioner through the design process for the corridor that will be converted to a Road Diet design. Chapter 5 details post-implementation evaluation processes to measure Road Diet performance. Several evaluations exist for determining the effect a Road Diet has on safety, operations, non-motorized transportation modes, and transit. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 367 Figure 4. Mid-Block Conflict Points for Four-Lane Undivided Roadway and Three-Lane Cross Section (Adapted from Welch, 1999) Four-Lane Undivided Three-Lane 7 2 Why Consider a Road Diet? Road Diets have the potential to improve safety, convenience, and quality of life for all road users. Road Diets can be relatively low cost if planned in conjunction with reconstruction or simple overlay projects since applying Road Diets consists primarily of restriping.11 2.1 Benefits of Road Diets For roads with appropriate traffic volumes, there is strong research support for achieving safety benefits through converting four-lane undivided roads to three-lane cross sections with TWLTLs. Operational and design changes associated with Road Diets that promote safety include reduced vehicle speeds, reduced vehicle-pedestrian, -bicycle, and -vehicle conflicts. For detailed information about the research behind the safety impacts of Road Diets, see Appendix A. 2.1.1 Improved Safety As noted previously, Road Diets reduce vehicle-to-vehicle conflicts that contribute to rear-end, left-turn, and sideswipe crashes by removing the four-lane undivided inside lanes serving both through and turning traffic. Studies indicate a 19 to 47 percent reduction in overall crashes when a Road Diet is installed on a previously four-lane undivided facility as well as a decrease in crashes involving drivers under 35 years of age and over 65 years of age.12,13 Road Diets improve safety by reducing the speed differential. On a four-lane undivided road, vehicle speeds can vary between travel lanes, and drivers frequently slow or change lanes due to slower or stopped vehicles (e.g., vehicles stopped in the left lane waiting to turn left). Drivers may also weave in and out of the traffic lanes at high speeds. In contrast, on three-lane roads with TWLTLs the vehicle speed differential is limited by the speed of the lead vehicle in the through lane, and through vehicles are separated from left-turning vehicles. Thus, Road Diets can reduce the vehicle speed differential and vehicle interactions, which can reduce the number and severity of vehicle-to-vehicle crashes. Reducing operating speed decreases crash severity when crashes do occur. The figures below illustrate conflict points and safety issues related to turning movements for four-lane undivided roadways and three-lane cross sections. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 368 Figure 6. Major-Street Left-Turn Sight Distance for Four-Lane Undivided Roadway and Three-Lane Cross Section (Adapted from Welch, 1999) Four-Lane Undivided (Outside Lane Traffic Hidden by Inside Lane Vehicle) Three-Lane (No Hidden Vehicles) Figure 5. Crossing and Through Traffic Conflict Points at Intersections for a Four-Lane Undivided Roadway and a Three-Lane Cross Section (Adapted from Welch, 1999) Four-Lane Undivided Three-Lane 82016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 369 Figure 8. Mid-block Pedestrian Refuge Island Photo Credit: Jennifer Atkinson Figure 7. Addition of a Bike Lane Creates a Buffer between Pedestrians and Moving Vehicles Photo Credit: Jennifer Atkinson 9 2.1.2 Operational Benefits Additionally, a Road Diet can provide the following operational benefits: • Separating Left Turns. Separating left-turning traffic has been shown to reduce delays at signalized intersections. • Side-street Traffic Crossing. Side-street traffic can more comfortably enter the mainline roadway because there are fewer lanes to cross. This can reduce side-street delay. • Speed Differential Reductions. The reduction of speed differential due to a Road Diet provides more consistent traffic flow and less “accordion-style” slow-and-go operations along the corridor. On some corridors the number and spacing of driveways and intersections leads to a high number of turning movements. In these cases, four-lane undivided roads can operate as de facto three-lane roadways. The majority of the through traffic uses the outside lanes due to the high number of left-turning traffic in the inside shared through and left-turn lane. In these cases a conversion to a three-lane cross section may not have much effect on operations. 2.1.3 Pedestrian and Bicyclist Benefits Road Diets can be of particular benefit to non- motorized road users. They reallocate space from travel lanes— space that is often converted to bike lanes or in some cases sidewalks, where these facilities were lacking previously. These new facilities have a tremendous impact on the mobility and safety of bicyclists and pedestrians as they fill in a gap in the existing network. Even the most basic Road Diet has benefits for pedestrians and bicyclists, regardless of whether specific facilities are provided for these modes. As mentioned above, the speed reductions that are associated with Road Diets lead to fewer and less severe crashes. The three-lane cross-section also makes crossing the roadway easier for pedestrians, as they have one fewer travel lanes to cross and are exposed to moving traffic for a shorter period of time. Uncontrolled and midblock pedestrian crossing locations tend to experience higher vehicle travel speeds, contributing to increased injury and fatality rates when pedestrian crashes occur. Midblock crossing locations account for more than 70 percent of pedestrian fatalities.14 Zegeer et al. (2001) found a reduction in pedestrian crash risk when crossing two- and three-lane roads compared to roads with four or more lanes.15 With the addition of a pedestrian refuge island – a raised island placed on a street to separate crossing pedestrians from motor vehicles (see Figure 8) – the crossing becomes shorter and less complicated. Pedestrians only have to be concerned with one direction of travel at a time. Refuge islands have been found to provide important safety benefits for pedestrians.16 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 370 Figure 9. Pedestrian Refuge Island on a Road Diet Corridor in Chicago Photo Credit: Stacey Meekins 10 Road Diets often include either on–street parking or a bike lane, which create a buffer between pedestrians and moving vehicles. This is especially beneficial in central business districts if officials desire to improve the pedestrian experience. For bicyclists, the biggest benefit of Road Diets is through the addition of bicycle facilities. A Road Diet can transform a street that was formerly difficult for a bicyclist to travel along to a comfortable route that attracts many more bicyclists. When bicycle lanes are striped, bicyclists are more visible and motorists know where to look for them, speeds are reduced, and bicycle safety can be improved. In some cases, buffered bicycle lanes are added by providing a visual or even physical barrier between modes of travel (e.g., adding flexible delineators on the lane line between motor vehicles and bicycles.) This further enhances the comfort of the route and may encourage increased usage. Even without a dedicated bicycle lane or buffer, a motorist on a three-lane roadway is able to move over closer to the center lane on a three-lane roadway when approaching a bicycle. A motorist on a four-lane undivided roadway will have less opportunity to move over to the left as it is an active travel lane. 2.1.4 Livability Benefits Added to the direct safety benefits, a Road Diet can improve the quality of life in the corridor through a combination of bicycle lanes, pedestrian improvements, and reduced speed differential, which can improve the comfort level for all users. Livability is, “about tying the quality and location of transportation facilities to broader opportunities such as access to good jobs, affordable housing, quality schools, and safer streets and roads.”17 Road Diets can help achieve desired livability on certain roadways. 2.2 Synergies and Trade-offs Interviews with agencies that have implemented Road Diets found many synergies between improvements for one mode and their impacts on another. The City of Chicago found that the addition of pedestrian refuge islands, as illustrated in Figure 9, was a significant benefit of their Road Diets. In some cases, improving pedestrian safety was the main objective of the Road Diet, but in other cases, the original intent was to add bicycle lanes or to simply address general traffic safety and/or operations issues. Table 2 summarizes the positive and negative potential impacts of various features of Road Diets based on findings from researcher field visits and agency interviews. Some of the treatments for one mode have obvious synergies with other modes, such as bicycle lanes that not only provide added comfort for bicyclists, but also for pedestrians by increasing their separation from vehicles. Other relationships are not as obvious. For instance, Road Diets in Iowa and Chicago generated increased vehicular traffic on the corridor, indicating an increase in demand after installation. In Pasadena, the unexpected benefit of a Road Diet to a pedestrian crossing (the pedestrians were able to safely cross more easily) eliminated the need for a pedestrian traffic signal, resulting in cost savings and the potential impacts of the traffic signal on traffic flow. Lessons Learned In one case in Grand Rapids, Michigan, the transit agency moved a bus route that had become too slow and unpredictable after a Road Diet. Pedestrian Refuge Pedestrian refuge islands can reduce pedestrian-related crashes by up to 46 percent.18 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 371 Benefits for Buses A Road Diet on Ingersoll Avenue in Des Moines, IA provided a benefit to buses: instead of stopping in a through lane and blocking traffic as they had done before the reconfiguration, the new design accommodated transit buses with a bus turn out. 11 The impacts on transit varied among the Road Diets studied. In some cases, the Road Diet was seen as a positive by the transit agency. In other cases, particularly in less urban areas, the reduction of travel lanes caused congestion as traffic backed up behind buses loading and unloading at the curb. A similar consequence as a result of mail delivery was also found in less urban areas. Prior to the Road Diet, vehicles were able to pass stopped buses or mail carrier vehicles using the inside lane. The back-ups that occurred after the conversion resulted in some vehicles making illegal maneuvers to pass the bus in the two-way left turn lane (TWLTL). Some Road Diets include measures to address this issue, such as shoulders or dedicated pull-outs that allow buses and mail trucks to make their stops outside the travel lane. Road Diets can also introduce some traffic safety concerns. One concern is the use by pedestrians of TWLTLs as a refuge, which could make pedestrians vulnerable to being struck by vehicles traveling in the TWLTL. However, as evidenced in published assessments of Road Diet implementations, pedestrian safety is generally enhanced by this type of roadway reconfiguration, especially if a pedestrian refuge island is included. Some impacts are seen as a positive by some agencies and a negative by others, which may be dependent on the context and users of the roadway. In Iowa, a Road Diet along a truck route narrowed lanes from 13 feet to 10 feet; these seemed too narrow to commercial vehicle drivers. Meanwhile, in Chicago and Michigan, shoulders and buffers between bicycle lanes and travel lanes were added primarily to keep travel lanes to 12 feet wide or less. In these cases, the wider lanes were undesirable because they encourage faster speeds. In addition, a common concern in implementing Road Diets is that drivers on cross- streets or driveways may have difficulty finding a suitable gap in traffic to enter the main roadway because through traffic is now using a single through lane. However, in Chicago it was found that some side street traffic had an easier time crossing the corridor after the Road Diet was installed because the traffic patterns were simpler and gaps were easier to find. In some States maintenance funding can be affected. Lane-miles are sometimes used as the measurement to calculate budgets for maintenance activities, defined only as those miles used for motor vehicle traffic – not bicycle lanes, parking, or other uses. When a Road Diet is introduced, one-quarter of the motor vehicle lane- miles are removed, which can equate to a similar reduction in maintenance funds. Discussions are underway in affected states to address this situation. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 372 12 Road Diet Feature Primary/Intended Impacts Secondary/Unintended Impacts Positive Negative Bike lanes • Increased mobility and safety for bicyclists, and higher bicycle volumes • Increased comfort level for bicyclists due to separation from vehicles • Increased property values• Could reduce parking, depending on design Fewer travel lanes • Reallocate space for other uses• Pedestrian crossings are easier, less complex • Can make finding a gap easier for cross-traffic • Allows for wider travel lanes • Mail trucks and transit vehicles can block traffic when stopped • May reduce capacity • In some jurisdiction, maintenance funding is tied to the number of lane-miles, so reducing the number of lanes can have a negative impact on maintenance budgets • Similarly, some Federal funds may be reduced • If travel lanes are widened, can encourage increased speeds Two-Way Left Turn Lane • Provide dedicated left turn lane• Makes efficient use of limited roadway area • Could be difficult for drivers to access left turn lane if demand for left turns is too high Pedestrian refuge island • Increased mobility and safety for pedestrians • Makes pedestrian crossings safer and easier • Prevents illegal use of the TWLTL to pass slower traffic or access an upstream turn lane • May create issues with snow removal • Can effectively increase congestion by preventing illegal maneuvers Buffers (grass, concrete median, plastic delineators) • Provide barriers and space between travel modes • Increases comfort level for bicyclists by increasing separation from vehicles • Barrier can prevent users entering a lane reserved for another mode • Grass and delineator buffers will necessitate ongoing maintenance. Table 2. Practitioner Interview Results Summary: Road Diet Installation Observations 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 373 Figure 10. Road Diet in Flint, Michigan, Central Business District Photo Credit: Jennifer Atkinson 13 While Road Diets can improve safety and accommodate motorized and non- motorized transportation modes along a corridor, they may not be appropriate or feasible in all locations. There are many factors to consider before implementing a Road Diet. Agencies should consider the objective of the Road Diet, which could be one or more of the following: • Improve safety • Reduce speeds • Mitigate queues associated with left-turning traffic • Improve pedestrian environment • Improve bicyclist accessibility • Enhance transit stops. Identifying the objective(s) will help determine whether the Road Diet is an appropriate alternative for the corridor that is being evaluated. Driveway density, transit routes, the number and design of intersections along the corridor, as well as operational characteristics are some considerations to be evaluated before deciding to implement a Road Diet. Other considerations include roadway function and access control, turning volumes and 85th percentile speed, crash type and patterns, pedestrian and bicycle activity, and right-of-way availability and cost.19 3.1 Safety Factors One of the primary reasons for a Road Diet installation is to address an identified crash problem. Four-lane undivided highways have inherent design aspects that make them susceptible to crashes. Left-turning and through movements sharing a single lane contributes to rear-end crashes, left-turn crashes, and speed discrepancies. In most cases, current four-lane undivided cross sections do not include accommodations for bicyclists, and most have no refuge for pedestrians to cross four lanes of traffic. When a Road Diet is considered for safety reasons, practitioners must determine if the crash patterns are those that can be addressed with this alternative. Overall, the statistical analyses of Road Diet conversion safety impacts have shown a range of positive results, with differences often related to whether the installation occurred in a rural or urban area. As such, this difference should be considered when determining Road Diet conversion feasibility. A more detailed discussion of expected safety improvements from a Road Diet conversion is contained in Chapter 2. The reduction in conflict points at intersections, improved sight distance, easier maneuverability for vehicles turning left, and the elimination of weaving are also contributors to the safety improvements at case study Road Diet conversion locations. It is speculated in the Iowa Road Diet guidelines that the only crash type that might increase with this type of conversion would be those related to the additional stop/start conflicts occurring between through and right-turn vehicles and due to the potential increase in congestion.20 3 Road Diet Feasibility Determination Low-Cost Solution The vast majority of Road Diets are installed on existing pavement within the right-of-way. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 374 14 3.2 Context Sensitive Solutions and Complete Streets FHWA defines a context sensitive solution (CSS) as a “collaborative, interdisciplinary approach that involves all stakeholders to develop a transportation facility that fits its physical setting and preserves scenic, aesthetic, historic, and environmental resources while maintaining safety and mobility. CSS is an approach that considers the total context within which a transportation improvement project will exist.”21 The topic of CSS comes into play when determining whether or not a Road Diet is “right” for a specific location. FHWA and the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) have directives and strong policy- level support for context-sensitive design. According to FHWA, CSS includes the following seven qualities of design excellence: 1. The project satisfies the purpose and needs as agreed to by a full range of stakeholders. This agreement is forged in the earliest phase of the project and amended as warranted as the project develops. 2. The project is a safe facility for both the user and the community. 3. The project is in harmony with the community, and it preserves environmental, scenic, aesthetic, historic, and natural resource values of the area. 4. The project exceeds the expectations of both designers and stakeholders and achieves a level of excellence in people's minds. 5. The project involves efficient and effective use of the resources (time, budget) of all involved parties. 6. The project is designed and built with minimal disruption to the community. 7. The project is seen as having added lasting value to the community.22 When considering whether to implement a Road Diet, part of the practitioner’s evaluation process should include whether it will meet these qualities. The concept of Complete Streets is similar to CSS in that it suggests that the street network should be planned, designed, maintained, and operated in a way that accommodates all road users and those who use the surrounding environment; not doing so will result in “incomplete” streets. The concept impacts the planning and design phases of a roadway as well as the day- to-day operations. What it means for a street to be complete is inherent to the context and will differ depending on how the street is intended to function, what types and volumes of road users it should accommodate, the destinations it serves, and the right-of-way available. Many communities have embraced this concept by adopting Complete Streets policies, establishing the expectation that all future roadway projects will adhere to the principle that streets should be designed with all users in mind rather than simply providing enough capacity for vehicle through-put. To aid in implementing the policy, many communities are also developing Complete Streets design guidelines, which address the examples listed and other intricacies of how the design of a roadway should relate to the surrounding context. Complete Streets Commitment More than 600 State, regional, and local jurisdictions have adopted Complete Streets policies or have made a written commitment to do so. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 375 Figure 11. Four-lane Undivided Roadway Intersection Operating as a de facto Three-lane Cross Section Photo Credit: Tom Welch 15 3.3 Operational Factors Consider the following common operational issues when determining the feasibility of a site for a Road Diet. 3.3.1 De Facto Three-Lane Roadway Operation The traditional definition of a roadway function is based on vehicular mobility and access. The functional goal for a potential Road Diet corridor should consider impacts on the mobility and access of all road users. Practitioners should also consider the adjacent land uses along a corridor. For example, a Road Diet is likely to succeed operationally if the roadway is already operating as a “de facto three-lane roadway.” A de facto three-lane roadway is one in which the left-turning vehicles along the existing four- lane undivided roadway have resulted in the majority of the through traffic using the outside lanes (see Figure 11). The overall objective of the Road Diet is to match the design with the intended or preferred function of the roadway for all road users. 3.3.2 Speed When possible, match vehicle speed to the context of surrounding land uses, such as through central business districts and neighborhoods, and to all road users. Sometimes this means that lower vehicle speeds are more desirable. These areas often have higher pedestrian and bicycle volumes in addition to younger pedestrians and bicyclists. The need to “calm” or reduce vehicle speeds is often cited as a reason for Road Diet conversions.23 Road Diets can reduce speed differential. The case study and simulation results of operational analyses from Converting Four- Lane Undivided Roadways to a Three-Lane Cross Section - Factors to Consider show that 85th percentile and average speed along conversions are likely to decrease by 3 to 5 mph.24 Anecdotal evidence from several case studies has shown that this type of conversion can result in lower vehicle speed variability. If speeding was documented in the four-lane undivided configuration, a Road Diet can be a useful tool for reducing speeds, especially high-end speeders. Studies have shown a reduction in 85th percentile speed of less than 5 mph 25,26 and in reducing the number of vehicles speeding excessively—defined as those going over 36 mph in a 30 mph speed zone.27 Another study also reported a 7 percent reduction in vehicles traveling over the posted speed limit.28 A greater reduction in speed was observed on corridors with higher traffic volumes.29 3.3.3 Level of Service (LOS) Level of Service (LOS) is a qualitative measure of traffic conditions using a quantitative stratification of a performance measure or measures. Consider LOS for two components: intersections and arterial segments. Corridors with closely spaced signalized intersections may have a larger impact on the Road Diet operation due to queuing affecting adjacent signalized intersections. This impact could be mitigated by signal timing and coordination between adjacent signals, allowing the corridor to be “flushed” with each green cycle. The City of Lansing, Michigan, goes a step further, considering updates to everything along a new Road Diet corridor, including potential changes to traffic control (e.g., signal removal, roundabout installation). 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 376 The LOS on urban arterials would provide a more accurate view of conditions for roads with longer distances between signalized intersections or no signalized intersections in the corridor. The arterial LOS as measured by vehicle speed is affected by signal spacing, access point frequency, number of left turning vehicles, and number of lanes. The difference in delays and queues should also be considered when determining the feasibility of a Road Diet conversion. After the conversion, the through vehicle delay due to turning traffic should typically decrease. The delays for left-turning vehicles, however, may increase because a similar through volume is now using one through lane rather than two. Through-vehicle delay and queuing along the main line and minor street approaches may also increase and should be considered during detailed analysis of this type of conversion. Once again, the difference in these measures can be small if the existing four-lane undivided roadway is generally operating at or close to that of a de facto three-lane roadway. Several measures that also can be used to mitigate and minimize these operational impacts include, but are not limited to, signal optimization and coordination, turn lane additions, and driveway consolidation. Of particular interest and focus should be minor street delays and queues at signalized intersections and the available gaps at unsignalized intersections or driveways. Practitioners should consider the mitigation of any negative impacts during the more detailed alternative analysis and evaluation and weigh them against benefits for non-motorized road users. 3.3.4 Quality of Service Quality of service is defined as a "quantitative indicator of the operational conditions of a facility or service and users' perception of these conditions."30 Agencies have used a number of objective and subjective measures, including "perceived level of safety and comfort" in Florida's bicycle and pedestrian level of service methodologies.31 Practitioners should consider user quality of service for individual intersections and arterial segments as well as the overall facility. New methodologies for urban street facilities in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) allow analysts to determine quality of service measures for automobiles, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit. The HCM 2010 notes that automobile mode quality of service is based on performance measures that are field-measurable, while the pedestrian and bicyclist qualities of service are based on traveler-reported scores based on perceived quality of service. Transit quality of service is based on changes in transit patronage that come from changes in service quality. In this context, a multimodal LOS (MMLOS) analysis is included to evaluate the LOS of each travel mode simultaneously (note that a combined LOS is not calculated). Strengths of the MMLOS analysis include the ability to quantify and assess quality of service trade-offs between modes and to help prioritize possible improvements that may impact each mode differently.32 What about Capacity? There is often concern about apparently reducing the capacity of a four-lane undivided roadway in half by converting it to a three- lane cross section with a Road Diet. Practitioners have found some cases of the four-lane undivided road operating as a de facto three-lane roadway due to turning movements and driver behavior. Therefore, the effective capacity reduction is much less than the theoretical reduction assumed before implementation.. 162016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 377 Figure 12. Road Diet Implementation Maximum Volume Thresholds by Agency 25 , 0 0 0 18 , 0 0 0 1 5 , 0 0 0 Maximum Volume for Road Diet (ADT) Seattle, WA Lansing, MI Pasadena, CA 17 Some of the following general trends are expected. • Pedestrian LOS scores are likely to improve due to the lane reduction, speed reduction, and the reallocation of traveled way width to bicycle lanes and on- street parking. • Bicycle LOS scores will improve as a result of some of the same factors, as well as the addition of a bicycle lane. • Applying a Road Diet configuration on a corridor with frequent signalized intersections will have a larger impact on automobile operations than it would on a corridor with more infrequent signal spacing. Frequently spaced signals are more likely to have queued traffic back up into adjacent signals’ effective areas, causing congestion issues at multiple intersections. In some cases this impact can be mitigated by optimizing the signal timing and coordinating between signals. The arterial automobile LOS will provide a more accurate view of conditions when there are longer distances between signalized intersections or only unsignalized intersections in the corridor. • The following factors will affect automobile LOS, as measured by vehicle speed: signal spacing, access point frequency, number of left-turning vehicles, and number of lanes. One study conducted a sensitivity analysis to determine at what hourly volume the arterial LOS would decline. It found that a two-way peak hour volume of 1,750 vehicles per hour (875 each direction) was the threshold when a decrease in LOS was observed.33 It also found this could be mitigated by signal timing optimization.34 3.3.5 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) The ADT provides a good first approximation on whether or not to consider a Road Diet conversion. If the ADT is near the upper limits of the study volumes, practitioners should conduct further analysis to determine its operational feasibility. This would include looking at peak hour volumes by direction and considering other factors such as signal spacing, turning volumes at intersections, and other access points. Each practitioner should use engineering judgment to decide how much analysis is necessary and take examples from this report as a guide. • A 2011 Kentucky study showed Road Diets could work up to an ADT of 23,000 vehicles per day (vpd).35 • In 2006, Gates, et al. suggested a maximum ADT of between 15,000 and 17,500 vpd.36 Knapp, Giese, and Lee have documented Road Diets with ADTs ranging from 8,500 to 24,000 vpd.37 The FHWA advises that roadways with ADT of 20,000 vpd or less may be good candidates for a Road Diet and should be evaluated for feasibility. Figure 12 shows the maximum ADTs used by several agencies to determine whether to install a Road Diet. Road Diet projects have been completed on roadways with relatively high traffic volumes in urban areas or near larger cities with satisfactory results. 3.3.6 Peak Hour and Peak Direction The peak hour volume in the peak direction will be the measure of volume driving the analysis and can determine whether the Road Diet can be feasibly implemented. This is the traffic volume that would be used in calculating LOS analysis for intersections or the arterial corridor. Peak-hour volumes along urban roadways typically represent 8 to 12 percent of the ADT along a roadway. The Iowa guidelines suggest, from an operational point of view, the following volume-based Road Diet feasibility conclusions (assuming a 50/50 directional split and 10 percent of the ADT during the peak hour):38 • Probably feasible at or below 750 vehicles per hour per direction (vphpd) during the peak hour. • Consider cautiously between 750 – 875 vphpd during the peak hour. • Feasibility less likely above 875 vphpd during the peak hour and expect reduced arterial LOS during the peak period. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 378 Figure 13. Bus Loading Zone in Seattle, Washington Photo Credit: City of Seattle 18 3.3.7 Turning Volumes and Patterns The volume and pattern of turning vehicles influences roadway safety and operation. Practitioners should assess turn volumes and patterns when considering the feasibility of a Road Diet conversion. In general, four-lane undivided roadways begin to operate in a manner similar to a three-lane roadway as the number of access points and left-turn volumes increase. In this situation the four-lane undivided roadway begins to operate as a de facto three-lane roadway and the operational impacts of a Road Diet conversion may be smaller. This type of situation, if expected during the entire design period, would be more likely to define a feasible Road Diet conversion location.39 If it is determined that the four-lane undivided to three-lane conversion is a feasible option along a roadway corridor, a more detailed operational analysis of the existing and expected through and turning volumes is necessary (see Chapter 4). The operation of each corridor is unique and requires an evaluation to determine if a Road Diet cross-section conversion is feasible. For example, if a major driveway exists along the corridor, it could change the potential impacts of a Road Diet by introducing another (often closely-spaced) opportunity for additional vehicular turning movements. If motorists are trying to turn into driveways opposite each other, opposite-direction vehicles could end up in the TWLTL and have potential conflicts. Offset intersections can cause a similar problem, as vehicular left-turning traffic can enter the TWLTL from opposite directions, desiring the same space from which to make their turn. Depending on the design of intersections and driveways, along with the volume of left turning traffic, this can result in potential conflicts. 3.3.8 Frequently Stopping and Slow-Moving Vehicles The number and frequency of slow-moving and frequently stopping vehicles using a roadway corridor is a factor to consider when evaluating the application of a Road Diet conversion. Some examples of these types of vehicles include agricultural equipment, transit buses, curb-side mail delivery, trash pick-up, and horse-drawn vehicles. These types of vehicles have a greater impact on the operation of a three-lane roadway than a four-lane undivided roadway. The primary reason for this increased impact is the inability of other vehicles to legally pass frequently stopping or slow-moving vehicles. When determining the feasibility of a Road Diet conversion, practitioners should take into account the number and duration of vehicle stops along the corridor (particularly during peak hours), as well as the enforcement levels needed to deter illegal passing. One potential mitigation measure to minimize the impact of frequently stopping vehicles is to provide pull- out areas at specific locations along the corridor. Another potential mitigation is to use some of the existing cross section for these types of vehicles (e.g., a transit lane). Improvements to intersection and driveway radii or pavement markings to serve these types of vehicles should also be considered if the Road Diet is selected as a feasible option. Simulated comparisons of a quarter-mile, four-lane, undivided roadway with a three-lane roadway, each having different percentages of heavy vehicles, one to two bus stops, and various headways and dwell times (with a set amount of entering volumes, number of access points, and turning volumes) showed that the impact of these vehicles on average arterial travel speed was much higher along the three-lane cross section than that of the four-lane undivided roadways.40 Vehicles illegally passing stopped or slow-moving vehicles in the TWLTL did not appear to be a regular problem in the Iowa case studies. If this does occur, consider enforcement and education about the use of TWLTLs as appropriate. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 379 Figure 14. Buffered Bicycle Lanes on Wabash Avenue in Chicago Photo Credit: Stacey Meekins Figure 15. Pedestrians Buffered from Traffic in Reston, VA Photo Credit: Richard Retting 19 3.4 Bicycles, Pedestrians, Transit, and Freight Considerations Embarking on a Road Diet presents an opportunity to dedicate more space to other roadway users and create a more balanced transportation system. For bicyclists in particular, Road Diets often include adding bicycle lanes to a street with little or no accommodation for bicyclists. The bicycle lane makes that route an option for many who would have been too intimidated to use the street previously. For pedestrians, Road Diets help reduce vehicle speeds and speed discrepancies midblock, making crossings easier and safer.41 Transit vehicles may find more space available for bus stops but may also face new challenges, such as blocking the single through lane along a corridor when stopped. Freight operators have special needs, especially for delivery of goods to businesses, that should be accommodated along the corridor. Community members feel Road Diet conversions improve their quality of life. Iowa case study results found that pedestrians and bicyclists, along with adjacent land owners, often preferred the three-lane cross section. Conflicts between bicyclists, pedestrians, and vehicles can be reduced and the complexity of crossing maneuvers decreased. Road Diet effects on quality of life are discussed in more detail in Road Diet Handbook: Setting Trends for Livable Streets.42 If corridors have existing or planned transit routes, the interrelation between transit operations (e.g., number of dedicated stops and frequency of trips) and other roadway users (i.e., vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians) should be assessed before determining whether or not to implement a Road Diet. The following sections present considerations and examples of how Road Diets may be implemented with pedestrians, bicycles, transit, and freight operations in mind. 3.4.1 Bicycle Considerations Bicycle routes should be part of an overall network. One of the things to consider when determining whether a street is appropriate for a Road Diet is whether it fills in a gap in the overall network, or if it is part of a planned network. Many agencies, including the Los Angeles, Seattle, and Chicago DOTs, have sought out potential locations for Road Diets to complete the networks identified in their bicycle master plans. If a formal bicycle network has not been identified, the roadway in question may still benefit from bicycle facilities. The street should first be studied to determine if there is any existing bicycle activity along it. If bicyclists are already using the roadway without a facility, significantly more bicyclists will likely use the route after a Road Diet. Whether or not there is existing activity, demand for a bicycle facility should be estimated. In cases where there are already bicycle facilities, a Road Diet may be an opportunity to further enhance the comfort of bicyclists by adding buffer space or converting a standard bicycle lane to a protected bicycle lane. Adding buffers may have additional benefits to other users as well. For instance, where the goal is to lower speeds, adding buffers to narrow travel lanes may accomplish that, which would be a benefit to pedestrians as well as bicyclists (see Figure 14). 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 380 Figure 16. 55th Street in Chicago: Transit and Bicycles Share an Area at the Intersection (left); Transit Stop and Bicycle Lane (right); Photo Credit: Stacey Meekins 20 3.4.2 Pedestrian Considerations The primary items for consideration for pedestrians are similar in nature to those for bicyclists – is there already a sidewalk available; what is the level of pedestrian activity; could the activity be expected to increase with the addition of facilities? If there are no sidewalks currently lining the roadway, designers should consider adding them with the Road Diet. In rural contexts, a sidewalk may not be necessary, but in these situations, a paved shoulder should at least be considered as a pedestrian accommodation. Along a section of Soapstone Road in Reston, Virginia, a Road Diet converted the road from two travel lanes in each direction to one lane of travel and a bicycle lane in each direction, separated by a TWLTL. Pedestrians can be observed walking in the road at locations that lacked sidewalks near the transition into the three-lane section, as shown in Figure 15. In this case the Road Diet treatment provides a safety benefit by increasing the separation between pedestrians and motor vehicles. The history of pedestrian crashes should factor into the decision as to whether to implement a Road Diet and what the components of the Road Diet ought to be. Crashes can be reduced by adding sidewalks or a shoulder, adding pedestrian refuge islands, and simply by slowing cars and reducing the number of lanes pedestrians must cross. Pedestrian refuge islands should also be considered. The land use and the intended pedestrian environment will also factor into the decision as to whether to implement a Road Diet. 3.4.3 Transit Considerations It is important to consider transit operations along a corridor being evaluated for a Road Diet, and also to consider the impacts of new transit needs that affect all road users. The conversion should not result in transit causing undue additional delay to general purpose traffic, though in many cases buses that stopped in the rightmost through lane before the conversion will stop in the only through lane after the Road Diet is installed. Bus stops are typically located along the curb with on-street parking removed, although some corridors may include pull outs to prevent buses from blocking through traffic. Pull-outs are often not preferred by transit operators due to difficulties with ingress and egress from the mainline. Agencies should work with transit providers in the corridor to make sure their needs are being addressed. This is also a good time to have the transit provider look at bus stop spacing and location. Some stops could potentially be eliminated or moved from either near-side or far-side locations at intersections to provide a better pedestrian connection or to prevent buses from blocking the line of sight between pedestrians and motorists. If buses end up partially blocking the through lane after a Road Diet conversion, then vehicles may end up passing the bus in the two-way left turn lane. This issue can be remediated by applying physical barriers (e.g., channelizing devices along the outer edge line of the TWLTL) to prevent the maneuver, depending on the frequency and severity of the violation. On 55th Street in Chicago, the City installed a Road Diet from Cottage Grove Avenue to Woodlawn Avenue. This corridor served as an existing transit route, and the City also wanted to incorporate bicycle facilities. Significant coordination with the Chicago Transit Authority was necessary to address the needs of the transit providers, while also accommodating the new bicycle lanes. Figure 16 shows how transit and bicycle lanes are both accommodated on 55th Street. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 381 21 The City of Seattle works closely with transit providers in corridors where Road Diets are proposed. The transit agency reviews the proposed geometry and comments on needed changes to accommodate buses. In addition, Seattle has developed transit priority corridors with the following attributes: 3.4.4 Freight Considerations There are instances where a corridor proposed for a Road Diet will need to accommodate truck movements. Freight operations on corridors are largely driven by demand-induced truck volumes, the proximity of alternative or parallel corridors, and the land use characteristics along or near the corridor. Freight operations can range from routine deliveries along the corridor to throughput of freight generated within and outside a region. When evaluating a corridor for a Road Diet, current and future freight operations should be considered. While there is limited information available on freight considerations when compared to other areas addressed in this section, the Complete Streets guide published by The New York State Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations (NYSAMPO) notes that, “Complete streets are often used to stimulate economic development, ideally as compact mixed-use with retail, commercial, and residential spaces. Designers must consider how stores and restaurants will receive deliveries, and where visitors and residents will park their cars without interfering with the needs of pedestrians, cyclists, or transit. Concepts include rear delivery access and strategically placed loading zones with time restrictions.” 43 Road Diets can appropriately accommodate freight movements while also serving other transportation users if some key factors are considered during the planning process. The NYSAMPO has identified the following considerations that should be factored in when addressing truck movements in complete streets settings.44 1) Current Land Use. Different uses generate different volumes and types of large truck movements. For example, restaurants may generate relatively high volumes of trucks, while lower density residential typically will not. Keeping the land uses along a corridor in mind will help agencies appropriately design Road Diets to meet local needs. 2) Truck Size. Corridors that serve or connect to larger industrial properties may serve larger trucks that cannot easily maneuver on narrower roads. By contrast, commercial retail stores and offices are often served by smaller unit delivery trucks. 3) Delivery Parking Areas. Some urban areas can accommodate deliveries via alleys or side streets, thereby avoiding trucks stopping on the main street to deliver. Other options include dedicated curbside delivery parking areas or off-street parking lots. Still other urban areas lack dedicated truck delivery parking areas, making it more difficult for delivery trucks to find parking and increasing conflicts for all users. 4) Intersection Design. Intersections where large trucks are often making turns should be designed with wider curb radii to accommodate truck movements. Intersections that experience few truck movements, few truck turns, and/or almost exclusively serve smaller trucks have lesser intersection turning radii requirements. Road Diet Effects on Seattle's Electric Buses The City of Seattle has a fleet of electric buses that use overhead wires to provide eco-friendly and cost- effective services. For a proposed Road Diet project on Myrtle Street, King County Metro asked if the bus could continue using the same overhead wires with the new lane configuration. If so, then the Road Diet would be a low-cost solution. If not, it would be very expensive to move the wires. After testing the situation they determined that the buses could reach the wires, so the Road Diet project was installed. • Bus priority at traffic signals. • Queue jump lanes for buses at signalized intersections. • In-lane bus stops for transit efficiency. • Pedestrian safety treatments for transit users and on-time bus service. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 382 22 Engaging freight stakeholders early in the project planning and development process provides an opportunity to align freight mobility with the goals of a planned Road Diet. Outreach to stakeholders such as business owners, commercial and industrial property owners, and local carriers can be useful to identify potential issues with a Road Diet implementation. While engagement with freight stakeholders does not guarantee all conflicts will be resolved, it increases the likelihood of agreement on a Road Diet approach that balances freight mobility, safety, economic growth, and community needs to enhance quality of life. 3.5 Other Feasibility Determination Factors The feasibility of converting a four-lane, undivided roadway to a three-lane cross section as a possible alternative along a particular corridor can be evaluated, at least partially, through the consideration of several feasibility determination factors (FDFs), as discussed earlier in this chapter. If the existing or preferred characteristics of the FDFs match the objectives or goals for the corridor under consideration, the Road Diet configuration should be included as one option in a more detailed alternative cross- section analysis and comparison. Overall, Road Diet feasibility is tied to the ability to design the facility within the existing roadway cross section or right-of-way. However, in some cases, the corridor FDFs may require some mitigation to achieve a desirable outcome after a Road Diet conversion. The acceptability and impacts of this type of mitigation should be considered in general when determining the feasibility of the Road Diet option. A more detailed analysis would need to be completed when all feasible corridor cross section alternatives are evaluated and compared. Planning/policy, geometrics, safety, and operational details for Road Diets are discussed in other sections of this guide. The factors discussed in this section include the following: • Right-of-Way availability and cost. • Parallel roadways. • Parallel parking. • At-grade railroad crossings. • Public outreach, public relations, and political considerations. The content of the discussion that follows was generally derived from Converting Four-Lane Undivided Roadways to a Three- Lane Cross Section: Factors to Consider. Other information has been added based on more recent research efforts and agency experience with Road Diet implementation and evaluation. Appendix B includes a summary table of feasibility factors, their characteristics, and a series of sample evaluative questions. 3.5.1 Right-of-Way Availability and Cost Practitioners frequently consider the conversion of a four-lane, undivided cross section to three lanes when additional right-of- way or project funding is limited. Many Road Diet conversions can be completed within the existing curb-to-curb or roadway pavement envelope. However, changes in width at specific locations and occasionally additional right-of-way may be necessary (e.g., at intersections for right-turn lanes). A Road Diet conversion may be less feasible when these types of activities increase. In many cases a Road Diet conversion may only consist of changes in pavement markings. The inclusion of a Road Diet conversion as a feasible option for further consideration is more likely if there are limitations on available right-of-way. 3.5.2 Parallel Roadways Road Diets can cause some diversion of traffic to parallel routes. A determination will be needed to establish whether the parallel routes would be desirable by through vehicle drivers on the corridor of interest. This can be established through discussions with those that travel the roadway or the application of appropriate simulation software. The distance between parallel arterials should also be considered. It is less likely that vehicles will divert to parallel routes that are farther away or that are just as congested. The other consideration is vehicles shifting to parallel non-arterial streets as “cut-through” traffic. Collecting before- and-after traffic data can inform the practitioner if this is occurring. Some community members may be more sensitive to this, so having data can help clearly define whether this is a problem. If there is an increase in cut-through traffic, traffic calming or other mitigation measures on parallel streets may be warranted. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 383 23 3.5.3 Parallel Parking The existence of parallel parking (full-time or only during part of the day) and its impact on the feasibility of a Road Diet conversion should be evaluated. The difference in the impacts of the parking maneuvers on the four-lane undivided versus the three-lane cross section need to be compared. In addition, if a bicycle lane is added after the conversion, the interaction between bicyclists and vehicles being parked should be considered. Parallel parking can be and has been included along three-lane roadways. 3.5.4 At-Grade Railroad Crossings An important consideration in the feasibility of converting four-lane, undivided roadway to three lanes is the existence of railroad crossings. Vehicles queued at an at-grade rail crossing will need to be served by one through lane after the Road Diet conversion. This could result in queues that are approximately twice as long. If this type of queuing is not acceptable along the three-lane cross section, it could affect feasibility. It is also important to consider at-grade crossings for railroads that closely parallel the corridor of interest. In the case of a nearby parallel railroad, the additional queuing due to a train would occur in the TWLTL in one direction and the through lane in the other direction. If operation of the converted corridor is needed while a train passes, the addition of a right-turn lane with adequate storage may be necessary for mitigation. The consideration of the signalization at these intersections (if it exists) also requires special attention both before and after the Road Diet conversion (if it occurs). 3.5.5 Public Outreach, Public Relations, and Political Considerations According to the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission’s Regional Road Diet Analysis Feasibility Assessment, “Education and outreach play a critical role in the success of a Road Diet. Many projects have demonstrated that public opposition can be strong in the early stages of a project. However, with committed stakeholders and an organized education and outreach program, the public can be better informed about the advantages and disadvantages of Road Diets.” 45 Road Diet conversions have been implemented for more than three decades. Their implementation, however, can still be very challenging. This type of conversion is relatively unusual and new to most transportation professionals, local jurisdictions, and the traveling public. In some cases the consideration of or proposal for a Road Diet can lead to some concern due to unfamiliarity. A temporary trial basis implementation of a Road Diet conversion has been used to address public concerns. This approach requires the restriping of the pavement within the proposed Road Diet area for a period of time before a determination is made to continue with a permanent Road Diet installation. Temporary pavement marking materials similar to those used in construction work zones can be considered for this purpose. 3D Visualization The use of 3D visualization may serve as an effective tool to help local stakeholders visualize a proposed Road Diet and assess impacts associated with the installation. Design visualization allows viewers to see the corridor from several vantage points, such as a commercial vehicle, a motor vehicle, a bicycle, or a pedestrian. 23 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 384 24 Consider signalization adjustments and any potential issues related to turning vehicles. During the trial basis time period, a series of before-and-after operational studies can be completed; some preliminary crash analysis can be performed; and surveys can be conducted among adjacent land owners, first responders, etc. If the trial yields positive results, consider implementing a more permanent Road Diet conversion. If it is determined that a Road Diet is not the best option for the corridor, the roadway can be changed back to its original lane configuration. Michigan DOT (MDOT), with support from FHWA, has implemented Road Diets using the trial basis approach to appeal to communities where Road Diets may be feasible but are not embraced locally. In a few localities where citizens or local officials have objected to an MDOT-proposed Road Diet, MDOT has tempered its proposal with a guarantee: the agency will install the Road Diet on a trial basis, and will return the road to four lanes at the end of the trial if the community requests it. The evaluation criterion in this case is simple: what does the community want? As a result, many corridors have retained their Road Diet conversion with only two corridors being returned to four-lane undivided sections in Michigan. MDOT and FHWA believe that this is an effective approach to demonstrate the safety countermeasure to a community. 3.6 Case Studies: Feasibility Determination Decision-making Several agencies apply general “rules of thumb” when first considering Road Diets. This section summarizes the factors and design parameters agencies should use when considering a Road Diet. Seattle DOT considers the following facets of transportation operations, mobility, and safety in the selection of a Road Diet corridor: 46 • Volume of traffic – up to 25,000 vehicles per day • Number of collisions – all modes (motor vehicle, pedestrian, bicycle) • Vehicle speed • Number of lanes • Freight usage • Bus stops and routing • Travel time • Accessibility. To guide Road Diet implementations, Seattle DOT developed the flow chart shown in Figure 17 to support its Road Diet decision-making process. First, the city calculates the ADT of the roadway segment in question, combined with signal spacing. In some cases this will lead to additional operational analyses of the entire corridor or key intersections. Depending on the results of this additional analysis, further modeling may be required (e.g., via Highway Capacity Software or Synchro). Those results may require modifications to the design to accommodate traffic. Once the simulation results are satisfactory, the Traffic Operations Manager and Signal Operations Manager must formally approve the Road Diet project to move forward. Chicago DOT (CDOT) has started developing guidelines for when and where to implement Road Diets at the time of this writing. Crashes are the most important reason for them to consider a Road Diet, followed by traffic volumes that do not warrant the current number of lanes. CDOT considers a roadway up to 15,000 – 18,000 ADT to be a good candidate for a Road Diet. However, the agency believes that the design hourly volume (DHV) may be a better parameter to use than ADT. A Road Diet would be feasible with a peak hourly volume of 1,000; at higher volumes, signal modifications may be necessary, and implementing left-turn phases is important where the traffic volumes are high. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 385 ADT <10K YES NO 16K+ Or �⅛ mile spacing between signals 10 - 16K or ¼ to ½ mile signal spacing 25K+ Corridor Analysis Required Key Intersection Analysis Required Synchro Model 30%+ Travel Time 2+ LOS Change <30% TT Change Corridor LOS = D or better�LOS E at critical approaches Synchro Model LOS & Critical Approach � E LOS F or Critical Approach F Modify Design >700 vphpd >200 vphLT <700 vphpd <200 vphLT No Model Required NOTES: vphpd = Vehicles per hour per direction vphLT = Left-turning vehicles per hour ADT = Average Daily Trac LOS = Level of Service Tweak Modify Design TO Manager Approval SO Manager Approval YES Proceed with Community Process TO & SO Manager Approval Modeling Flow Chart for Road Diets [from 4/5 lanes to 3 lanes] Figure 17. City of Seattle Modeling Flow Chart for Road Diet Feasibility Determination 25 Michigan DOT gives the following outline for guidance related to reducing lanes when considering implementation of a Road Diet: 1. Planning and Policy – Includes information on the purpose and need for the Road Diet, planning considerations for the local community and regional planning agency, Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) processes, etc. 2. Feasibility Determination Factors – Includes information regarding traffic volumes, traffic modeling, turning movements, level of service, crash analysis, etc. 3. Operational Criteria – Includes information regarding acceptable Level of Service (LOS) and improvements related to certain crash types. 4. Geometric Design Criteria – Describes maintaining proper geometrics using major road standards. 5. Systems Considerations – Includes considerations regarding parking, pedestrian and bicycle issues, school routes, etc. 6. Project Costs – Describes financial arrangements for cost-share projects. 7. Public Involvement – Describes the communication process prior to implementation.47 Michigan DOT has chosen to view all existing four-lane, undivided roads as potential implementation sites. Many local Michigan agencies believe that a three-lane cross-section is the desirable road section compared to two-lane and four-lane undivided sections, and they actively work to identify which four-lane undivided roads are good candidates for Road Diets. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 386 Figure 18. Painted Buffer Between Through Lane and Bicycle Lane in Lansing, Michigan Photo Credit: Jennifer Atkinson 26 The City of Grand Rapids, MI takes a holistic view of Road Diet implementations by first identifying all four-lane, undivided facilities within their jurisdiction. For each road or segment identified, the agency then records and tracks traffic volumes, corridor use (whether a commercial route, incident bypass route, neighborhood traffic, school bus/transit route, etc.), and how the corridor operates under existing conditions.48 The City of Lansing, MI has established the following minimum post-implementation lane width guidance: • 11-ft. through lanes • 5-ft. bike lanes49 • 10-ft. turn lanes (left and right). This guidance was established based on the city’s experience; at some vehicle lane widths the roadway encourages side-by-side traffic, and some bicycle lane widths can encourage parking. Where undesignated pavement width exists, the city paints a buffer zone between the travel lane and bike lane, as shown in Figure 18. This provides a buffer between vehicles and bicycle traffic and helps allocate unused pavement without creating wide lanes. The Genesee County Metropolitan Planning Commission (GCMPC) in Michigan is both progressive and aggressive in its approach to installing Road Diets. Although the first Road Diet in the GCMPC area occurred in 1990, the real boost to widespread implementation of Road Diets within this area occurred in 2009. The catalyst was the completion of a technical study in which the GCMPC assessed more than 140 miles of four-lane undivided road in its jurisdiction for potential conversion to three lanes. This study provided a summary of operating features and crash results for eight completed Road Diets in the area and offered a comparative assessment ranking the desirability of all remaining four-lane sections for Road Diet consideration.50 The local agencies within the region first targeted routes with low ADTs that would allow for easy conversion and result in safety benefits; routes carrying 6,000 – 8,000 AADT were selected for the first conversions. After several conversions and positive public opinions of Road Diets, GCMPC began selecting implementation sites with higher volumes – up to 15,000 AADT. Each year, GCMPC selects competitive road improvement projects submitted by its 32 local agencies. Potential Road Diet locations are scored and prioritized on criteria such as the following: • Existing level of service; • Lane width (existing and proposed); • Number of driveway approaches within the Road Diet segment; and • Crash types that may be mitigated by installation. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 387 27 The GCMPC involves representatives from all modes of transportation, elected officials, and local agency partners. These stakeholders are involved from the beginning of the planning process and collaborate through the Road Diet installation. GCMPC feels that working together with these stakeholders gives a sense of project awareness and buy-in. It also helps to overcome obstacles or concerns that arise along the way, leading to smoother implementation. GCMPC encourages local agencies within their jurisdiction to restripe existing four-lane undivided segments as three-lane Road Diets as a part of their ongoing annual or bi-annual restriping plans. During the Road Diet study, GCMPC looked at several parameters to determine conversion suitability. Using these criteria, a 4-scale rating system was developed to measure compatibility of each road segment. These included: • Crash data. Rates of traffic crashes for sideswipe, head-on, head-on-left-turn, angle, rear-end, and rear-end-left-turn crashes that are higher than the average for roadways with similar functional classification can be a good indicator for compatibility. • Lane width. Four-lane roadways with lanes widths less than 12 feet may be good candidates as the narrow lanes can cause conflicts for passing vehicles. • Speed limits and operating speeds. A Road Diet may be beneficial where traffic calming is needed. • Surface type. A road that has concrete on the inside lanes and asphalt on the outside lanes (or the other way around) may be a poor candidate as the difference in pavement color may be used to distinguish travel lanes rather than the painted lane markers. This is especially true during inclement weather events or evening/morning driving as a result of sun glare. • ADT. GCMPC considers ADT less than 10,000 feasible, between 10,000 and 20,000 potentially feasible depending on site- specific conditions, and more than 20,000 likely not feasible. • Number of traffic signals. This is one of the many factors used to determine compatibility and is site specific. • Land use. A Road Diet may be beneficial on corridors that have a lot of turning movements such as a block-style street grid, shopping areas, school zones, etc. Overall, the efforts of GCMPC to install Road Diets have resulted in a number of installations. Four years ago, a Road Diet proposal from a local agency would have been unusual, but they are common now in GCMPC’s annual call for projects. From the local agencies’ standpoint, they feel that the extraordinary efforts of the planning agency and subsequent educational follow-up by GCMPC have facilitated implementation at the local level. Based on recent interviews with practitioners, agency considerations for Road Diet implementation are shown in Table 3. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 388 28 3.7 Funding Road Diets Road Diets can be funded from a number of different sources based on the needs of the agency. Road Diets are typically eligible for Surface Transportation Program (STP), Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) or other Federal-aid funds where data support the expenditure. However, there are other benefits of Road Diets and other reasons for their installation, so the other funding sources available vary widely from Federal, State, and local sources. For example, the Seattle DOT (SDOT) has used funding from such sources as Safe Routes to School grants, Washington State DOT pedestrian and bicycle funds, and transit grants. The agency also monitors the city’s road resurfacing projects to see whether upcoming streets scheduled for upcoming roadway overlay projects are good candidates for Road Diets. This allows Seattle DOT to use the annual paving program funds for some installations. Road Diet Implementation Considerations Ma x i m u m V o l u m e , A D T Ma x i m u m P e a k Vo l u m e s , D H V Minimum Lane Width, ft. Cr a s h H i s t o r y Ve h i c l e S p e e d Nu m b e r o f L a n e s Tu r n i n g V o l u m e s Fr e i g h t U s a g e Pr e s e n c e o f T r a n s i t Pr e s e n c e o f B i c y c l e s Tr a v e l T i m e o r L O S Ac c e s s i b i l i t y Th r o u g h Le f t / R i g h t Bi c y c l e Chicago DOT  Seattle DOT  City of Lansing, MI  Michigan DOT  Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission  City of Las Vegas, NV  Genesee County (MI) Metropolitan Planning Commission  Table 3. Road Diet Implementation Considerations by Agency 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 389 29 As with any project development process, practitioners designing a Road Diet should take into account the principles and practices that guide design decisions, including geometric design and operational design. 4.1 Geometric Design Geometric design includes identifying details of the project in plan, profile, and cross section. It is necessary to apply the standard principles and practices of geometric design. Geometric designers are guided by standards and policies that include design criteria. The criteria serve as a guide to design and provide uniformity, but are not intended to be inflexible. Designers need flexibility to achieve context-specific needs and objectives. This is particularly true for Road Diet implementations. FHWA’s Flexibility in Highway Design illustrates the different methods available to highway engineers and project managers to design roads that move people and goods in a safe, efficient, and reliable way while at the same time fully considering community values for the corridor and broader location.51 AASHTO’s A Guide for Achieving Flexibility in Highway Design also shows how community and environmental issues can be integrated into decision-making throughout the project development process.52 Additional information about design flexibility pertaining to pedestrian and bicyclist facilities can be found in FHWA’s August 2013 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Design Flexibility memo.53 The practice of designing roads geometrically is evolving towards more performance-based approaches to analysis, where the expected transportation outcomes of geometric design decisions are quantified and used to support informed design decision- making. Performance-based analysis complements the ideas of design flexibility, context sensitive design, and practical design. Performance-prediction tools, such as the Highway Safety Manual, Highway Capacity Manual and others quantify how geometric design decisions impact measures of user accessibility, mobility, quality of service, reliability, and safety. A framework for conducting performance-based analysis is provided in the final report for NCHRP 15-34A, Performance-Based Analysis of Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. 4.1.1 Road Function and Context The functional classification system described by FHWA’s Functional Classification Guidelines and Updated Guidance for the Functional Classification of Highways often serves as a basis for establishing design criteria for a Road Diet project. AASHTO’s Green Book, for example, includes chapters organized by functional classification, with arterials divided into freeway and non-freeway facilities (e.g., Chapter 5, Local Roads and Streets; Chapter 6, Collector Roads and Streets; Chapter 7, Rural and Urban Arterials; and Chapter 8, Freeways). Alternative road classifications also exist. These alternative classification systems guide designers towards establishing design criteria that are complimentary to location-specific context where the Road Diet is being implemented. For example, the Smart Transportation Guidebook,54 jointly published by the Pennsylvania and New Jersey DOTs, more explicitly considers project setting by defining seven context areas from least to most developed: 1) Rural 2) Suburban neighborhood 3) Suburban corridor 4) Suburban center 5) Town/village neighborhood 6) Town center 7) Urban core. 4 Designing a Road Diet 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 390 30 The guidebook includes a set of quantifiable characteristics for each of the seven context areas and a recommendation that the land use context be identified based on this information. The quantifiable characteristics are summarized in Table 4. Land use contexts are broadly defined for road segments greater than 600 feet in length due to practical limitations on the frequency of changing the roadway typical section over a short stretch of road. Once the context area of the Road Diet is defined, the Smart Transportation Guidebook includes a “matrix of design values” with design criteria as rows and land use contexts as columns for five different roadway types: 1) regional arterial, 2) community arterial, 3) community collector, 4) neighborhood collector, and 5) local road. An example for regional arterials is shown in Table 5. This roadway typology is different than the existing functional classification system outlined by FHWA and was proposed to capture the actual role of the roadway in the surrounding community. Access, mobility, and speed are considered on the road segment of interest as opposed to using only one functional classification for an entire highway. This alternative approach to classifying the context area of the Road Diet beyond more traditional functional classification will encourage design criteria that are consistent with broader project surroundings and area characteristics. 4.1.2 Design Controls Design controls are fixed factors outside of the design process, but may dictate the result. Examples include vehicles, environment, traffic (non-motorized and motorized), and others, including applicable financial and regulatory influences. Candidate Road Diet locations may be identified due to the characteristics of these design controls at that location (see, for example, discussion in Chapter 3 of this guidebook). More broadly, designers should understand the intended project outcomes as well as the characteristics of the stakeholders that the Road Diet implementation is intended to serve. A thorough discussion of design controls appears in AASHTO’s A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets.55 This section summarizes some key points. Characteristic Rural Suburban Neighborhood Suburban Corridor Suburban Center Town/Village Neighborhood Town Center Urban Core Density Units (DU)a per acre (ac) 1 DU/20 acb 1-8 DU/ac 2-30 DU/ac 3-20 DU/ac 4-30 DU/ac 8-50 DU/ac 16-75 DU/ac Building Coverage NAc < 20%20-35%35-45%35-50%50-70%70-100% Lot Size/Area in square feet (sf) 20 ac 5,000 - 80,000 sf20,000- 200,000 sf 25,000-100,000 sf 2,000-12,000 sf2,000-20,000 sf 25,000- 100,000 sf Lot Frontaged NA 50 -200 ft.100-500 ft.100-300 ft.18-50 ft.25-200 ft.100-300 ft. Block Dimensions NA 400 ft. wide x variable length 200 ft. wide x variable length 300 ft. wide x variable length 200 ft. wide x 400 ft. long 200 ft. wide x 400 ft. long 200 ft. wide x 400 ft. long Max. Height 1-3 stories 1.5 -3 stories1 story retail; 3-5 story office 2-5 stories2-5 stories1-3 stories3-60 stories Min./Max. Setback Varies 20-80 ft.20-80 ft.20-80 ft.10-20 ft.0-20 ft.0-20 ft. a The guidebook does not define a density unit and may instead be referring to a dwelling unit; dwelling units per acre are used in the guidebook to define high-, medium-, and low-density areas. b acre c not applicable d The distance measured between points where side property lines meet road right-of-way lines Table 4. Quantifiable Characteristics of Land User Contexts (NJDOT & PennDOT, 2008) 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 391 31 Design Vehicles. Geometric designers “should consider the largest design vehicle that is likely to use [a] facility with considerable frequency or a design vehicle with special characteristics appropriate to a particular location in determining the design of such critical features as radii at intersections and radii of turning roadways.”56 Given that Road Diets are likely implemented as part of an overlay and restriping project, the design vehicle for the location has likely already been predetermined. Design vehicle characteristics are important when considering the new lane and shoulder widths (including possible traveled way widening on horizontal curves), storage lengths, and turning radii. Given that Road Diet implementation has reduced the number of lanes to one in each direction, design vehicle performance will have a greater impact on overall vehicle operations and the grade and critical length of grade may become more influential features impacting performance than for the four-lane, undivided cross section. Drivers. Considering driver performance remains as critical for Road Diet design as for any other facility type. Road Diet designs should be compatible with driver capabilities and limitations and should be laid out to meet driver expectations. Designers should consider positive guidance to all road users (e.g., pavement marking, signing, delineation) to make the desired path clear. Driver considerations in highway design are covered in FHWA’s A User’s Guide to Positive Guidance and NCHRP’s Human Factors Guidelines for Road Systems.57, 58 Road Diets can be particularly beneficial for older drivers who have slower reaction times and reflexes. According to FHWA’s Public Roads, “The safety potential of conversion to a three-lane cross-section (also called Road Diets) was so compelling to Iowa DOT officials, based on studies done in Minnesota, Montana, and Washington, that Iowa DOT made this project type a staple of its agency's older driver program at the program's inception in 1999.”59 Additional guidance on highway design, operational, and traffic engineering features, including Road Diets, for older road users is available in the FHWA Handbook for Designing Roadways for the Aging Population. Regional ArterialRural Suburban Neighborhood Suburban Corridor Suburban Center Town/Village Neighborhood Town/Village Center Urban Core Ro a d w a y Lane Width11’ to 12’11’ to 12’ (14’ to 15’ outside lane if no shoulder or bike lane) 11’ to 12’ (14’ to 15’ outside lane if no shoulder or bike lane) 11’ to 12’ (14’ outside lane if no shoulder or bike lane) 10’ to 12’ (14’ outside lane if not shoulder or bike lane) 10’ to 12’ (14’ outside lane if not shoulder or bike lane) 10’ to 12’ (14’ outside lane if not shoulder or bike lane) Paved Shoulder Width 8’ to 10’8’ to 10’8’ to 12’4’ to 6’ (if no parking or bike lane) 4’ to 6’ (if no parking or bike lane) 4’ to 6’ (if no parking or bike lane) 4’ to 6’ (if no parking or bike lane) Parking Lane NANA NA 8’ parallel 8’ parallel; see 7.2 for angled 8’ parallel; see 7.2 for angled 8’ parallel Bike Lane NA 5’ to 6’ (if no shoulder) 6’ (if no shoulder) 5’ to 6’5’ to 6’5’ to 6’5’ to 6’ Curb Return 30 ‘ to 50’25’ to 35’30’ to 50’25’ to 50’15’ to 40’15’ to 40’15’ to 40’ Number of Travel Lanes 2 to 62 to 6 4 to 64 to 62 to 4 2 to 42 to 6 Ro a d s i d e Clear Sidewalk Width NA 5’5’ to 6’5’ to 6’6’ to 8’6’ to 10’6’ to 12’ Buffer NA 6’+6’ to 10’4’ to 6’4’ to 6’4’ to 6’4’ to 6’ Shy Distance NANA NA 0’ to 2’0’ to 2’2’2’ Total Sidewalk Width NA 5’5’ to 6’9’ to 14’10’ to 16’12’ to 18’12’ to 20’ Sp e e d Desired Operating Speed (mph) 45-55 35-40 35-55 30-3530-35 30-3530-35 Table 5. Regional Arterial Design Matrix (NJDOT & PennDOT, 2008) 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 392 32 Non-motorized Users. When appropriately applied, Road Diets have generated benefits to users of all modes of transportation, including bicyclists, pedestrians, and motorists. Specific benefits to non-motorized users were covered previously. Pedestrian volumes and characteristics will influence the design of sidewalks, crosswalks, traffic control features, curb cuts, bus stops, and other locations where pedestrian traffic is expected. Guidance for designing roadways to accommodate pedestrians as well as designing pedestrian facilities themselves is contained in AASHTO’s Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities. Road Diets also provide the opportunity to add bicycle lanes to roads on which bicyclists previously shared lanes with motor vehicles or navigated between travel lanes and the edge of pavement. Bicycle dimensions and operating characteristics influence the design of bicycle facilities, as identified in AASHTO’s Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities.60 Furthermore, the FHWA supports the consideration of additional design options found in the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design Guide and the ITE Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares manuals in addition to the AASHTO bicycle and pedestrian guides to aid in designing safe and comfortable bicycle and pedestrian facilities. These resources expand practitioners’ options in how to accommodate these users.61 Speed. Speed is one of the most important and complex factors that both influences and is influenced by road geometrics. Drivers select travel speeds based on their perceptions of the road. Sometimes geometric design criteria can lead to operating speeds that are higher than design speeds for design speeds less than 55 mph. Road Diets have the potential to reduce operating speed differentials, but tend to have a modest effect on the average operating speed of the corridor (i.e., about 3 to 5 mph). The reduction in the number of through lanes can affect the speed differential by removing the ability to pass slower moving vehicles. Changes in the road cross section may also influence drivers’ perceptions of appropriate free-flow speeds. Geometric designers should seek to achieve speed harmony, defined in FHWA’s Speed Concepts: Informational Guide, as the condition that results when: • The designated design speed is within a specified range (i.e., ± 5mph) of the observed 85th percentile operating speed; • The 85th percentile operating speed is within a specified range (i.e., ± 5mph) of the posted speed limit; • The inferred design speed is equal to or greater than the designated design speed; and • The posted speed is less than or equal to the designated design speed.62 4.1.3 Elements of Design Principal elements of geometric design include sight distance, horizontal alignment, superelevation, and vertical alignment. Conversions do not generally involve significant changes in sight distance and alignment, but these characteristics may require additional assessment due to changes in cross-section allocation and use. Sight Distance. Drivers need sufficient sight distance to control the operation of their vehicles and avoid striking unexpected objects in the travel way. Stopping sight distance, decision sight distance, and intersection sight distance are most relevant to Road Diet locations. Stopping sight distance, or the distance required for a vehicle to stop before reaching a stationary object in its path, should be available at all points on the road. Decision sight distance should be provided at complex locations where drivers must make instantaneous decisions, where information is difficult to perceive, or where unexpected maneuvers are needed. Significant changes in alignment are not expected during Road Diet conversions, so changes in sight distance due to the alignment design are likely to be insignificant. Changes in vehicle position due to the cross section changes may have some impact on horizontal sight distance (i.e., available sight distance while traversing a horizontal curve, limited by sight obstructions on the inside of the curve). Critical sight distance analysis for Road Diet conversions will include pedestrian crossings, transit stops, and locations where on-street parked cars serve as possible sight obstructions. Road Diets can provide sight distance improvements for mid-block, left-turning drivers at entrances due to the conversion of the four-lane, undivided roadway to a TWLTL. Drivers in a four-lane, undivided situation experience negative offset with opposing traffic, which can block their view. In a TWLTL this negative offset is removed, so drivers making left turns have improved sight distance to make a safe movement. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 393 33 Grade. Designers select grades to provide uniform operation and enable operating speeds near the design speed of the roadways. Grades at locations with Road Diet conversions will likely already be determined. Maximum grades typically range from 5 to 12 percent and are determined based on functional classification, design speed, and terrain. The effects of grades on truck speeds are much greater than effects on passenger cars. Given that Road Diet implementation has reduced the cross section to one through lane in each direction, design vehicle performance will have a greater impact on overall vehicle operations and the grade and critical length of grade may become more influential features impacting performance than they were for the four-lane undivided cross section. Horizontal Curvature and Superelevation. Road Diet conversions are not likely to involve any significant changes in horizontal curvature and superelevation. Basic design speed, side friction, and superelevation relationships apply, and guidance is available in AASHTO's A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. Access Management. Given the operational change that will occur through a lane reduction in each direction of travel as well as the addition of a TWLTL, access management should be analyzed during the Road Diet conversion. Driveways are, in effect, low-volume intersections. The re-analysis should consider: • Operations and efficiency of the intersecting roadway (that underwent the Road Diet) • Ensuring high-volume driveways are not offset in the “wrong direction” • Access to property • Sight distance between vehicles and pedestrians • How driveways are used (e.g., backing out vs. forward-out-only) • Sidewalk continuity for pedestrians • Accessibility requirements • Accommodating bicycle lanes • Potential conflicts with bus stop locations. FHWA provides additional resources related to access management, including Access Management in the Vicinity of Intersections Technical Summary.63 4.1.4 Cross Sectional Elements There are a number of cross sectional elements to consider for a Road Diet conversion. For example, practitioners need to consider the commonly accepted range of lane widths, but the design must also fit within the existing curb-to-curb distance using flexibility in commonly used design manuals. The sections below discuss individual cross sectional design criteria. Lane widths. Lane width influences operations, safety, quality of service, and the security felt by road users. Widths of 10 to 12 feet are typically used in practice. Auxiliary lanes (i.e., turn lanes) at intersections are often the same width as through lanes, and seldom less than 10 feet. The width of the TWLT lane provided as part of a lane width conversion typically ranges from 10 to 16 feet. The width for a bus lane along these roadways is usually 11 to 15 feet.64 Median. A median is defined as the area between opposing travel lanes. Its main purpose is to separate opposing traffic. Design width depends upon the type of roadway and its location. On urban area arterial streets, a TWLTL can effectively accommodate left-turning traffic. When a flush median is used, practitioners should expect crossing and turning movements in and around the median.65 Pedestrian Refuge Island. A pedestrian refuge island both shortens the time and distance that a pedestrian is exposed to moving traffic while also simplifying the crossing. It provides a protected space in the roadway, allowing the pedestrian to make the crossing in two stages if necessary. In this situation, the pedestrian only has to focus on finding a gap in one direction of travel at a time. The refuge island should be a minimum of 6 feet wide, in the direction of pedestrian travel, with 8 to 10 feet preferred. The island should include detectable warning tiles where it meets the roadway. On streets with a TWLTL, pedestrian refuge islands can use the turn lane space where turns are prohibited, such as at an intersection with a one-way street, or can be installed adjacent to the TWLTL where space allows. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 394 Figure 19. Bicycle Lane on Rural 3-Lane Section, Lawyers Road, Reston, VA Photo Credit: Virginia DOT 34 Cross Slope. Generally, the crown or highpoint of the converted cross section is located in the center of the TWLTL, with the slope of the pavement the same as the adjacent through lanes. Typical cross slopes are 1.5 to 2 percent, and may be as high as 2.5 percent in areas of intense rainfall. Additional information on minimum accessibility standards is available in the Draft Public Rights of Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG). Shoulders. Shoulders are the portions of the roadway adjacent to the traveled way. In most Road Diet applications, curb-to- curb widths and the desire to allocate the space to traffic, bicycle lanes, and parking limit ability to provide shoulders. Painted buffers are sometimes provided between the traveled way and bicycle lanes, and those buffers offer some similar advantages as shoulders. Chapter 3 of this guide includes marking examples for undesignated pavement widths, including painted buffers between the traveled way and bicycle lanes. Curbs. Curbs may already be present at the Road Diet conversion location, as they are commonly used in lower speed urban and suburban areas. Curbs have multiple functions, including drainage, delineation, right-of-way reduction, and delineation of pedestrian walkways. Drainage. Drainage facilities include bridges, culverts, channels, curbs, gutters, and various types of drains. Road Diet conversions usually do not require significant changes in drainage design, as pavement widths and slopes remain relatively unchanged. AASHTO’s Highway Drainage Guidelines and Model Drainage Manual are two key drainage references used by designers.66, 67 Pedestrian Facilities. Road Diet conversions will not typically involve changes to the pedestrian sidewalk facilities outside the curb. They do benefit pedestrian performance in a number of other ways that have been noted throughout this document. For example, Road Diets may introduce the opportunity for on-street parking, creating a buffer between pedestrians and moving vehicles. The change in the roadway cross section also results in fewer travel lanes for pedestrians to cross. Separating opposing directions of travel by a TWLTL can provide space for a refuge island at pedestrian crossing locations, if necessary. Adding dedicated bike lanes to a roadway can positively impact pedestrians by getting bicyclists off the sidewalk and into the street. For any changes to the pedestrian facilities, including the addition of pedestrian refuge islands, designers can reference AASHTO’s Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities and the Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines.68, 69 Bicycle Facilities. Road Diets allow the addition or expansion of bicycle facilities. On roads where bicyclists previously shared lanes with motor vehicles or navigated between travel lanes and the edge of pavement, the opportunity to provide a separate facility arises. Where bicycle lanes already existed, the Road Diet presents an opportunity to provide even more separation by adding a painted buffer or a physical separation using parked cars, bollards, or curb. Bicycle lane widths should be determined based on context and anticipated use, including the speed, volume, and types of vehicles in adjacent lanes. AASHTO’s Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities covers the design of these bicycle lanes.70 Under typical circumstances, the width of a one-way bicycle lane is 5 feet. A minimum width of 4 feet can be used on roadways with no curb and gutter. Wider bicycle lanes should be considered when feasible, and especially at locations with narrower parking lanes (e.g., 7 feet), high bicycle volumes, and higher speed roadways or roadways with a significant number of larger vehicles. When 7 feet or more is available for the bicycle facility, a buffered or protected bike facility should be considered. Typical bicycle lane cross sections are illustrated in Figure 20. The presence of a bicycle lane influences the recommended design of on- street parking accommodations as well. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 395 Figure 20. Typical Bike Lane Cross Sections (Adapted from AASHTO) Width Varies Parking Lane Travel Lanes Width Varies Parking Lane 5-6 ft. Bike Lane 5-6 ft. Bike Lane Optional Normal Solid White Line* Normal Solid White Line Travel Lanes 5-6 ft. Bike Lane 5-6 ft. Bike Lane Normal Solid White Line On Street Parking Parking Prohibited 6 ft20 ft 20 ft 8 f t 6 ft Figure 21. Paired Parking Illustration 35 On-street Parking. Road Diets provide the opportunity for parallel or diagonal on-street parking. The desirable minimum width of a parallel parking lane is 8 feet, as most vehicles will occupy approximately 7 feet of actual street space when parallel parked. A parking lane width of 10 to 12 feet may be desirable to provide additional clearance from the traveled way and accommodate transit operations, though some jurisdictions have used parking lane widths as narrow as 7 feet, particularly where only passenger cars need to be accommodated in the parking lane.71 As noted, parallel parking lanes may also be separated from bicycle lanes by an optional solid white line. Where parallel parking and bike lanes are present, but a parking lane line or stall markings are not used, the recommended width of the shared bicycle and parking lane is 13 feet. In addition, practitioners could consider “paired parking” to reduce conflicts and delays with vehicle parking (see Figure 21). The treatment of a parking lane approaching an intersection requires special consideration. If the lane is carried up to the intersection, right-turning vehicles may use it in the absence of parked vehicles, potentially leading to undesirable operations. However, keeping a parking lane can increase the effective corner radius for large right-turning vehicles. Other options include using a parking lane transition (i.e., a “bulb out,” as shown in Figure 22) or prohibiting parking a certain distance from the intersection. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 396 Figure 22. Example Parking Lane Transition at Intersection (Adapted from AASHTO, 2011) Property Line 8 ft22 to 26 ft 20 ft20 ft 8 f t No Parking 36 Bus Turnouts. One potential concern with a Road Diet installation is that stopped buses in the now-singular through lane block all downstream vehicles while loading and unloading. The paved width available with the installation of a Road Diet provides space for potential accommodations for bus operations (e.g., stopping, loading, unloading) away from the traveled way by using a turnout. Bus stop locations should provide about 50 feet in length for each bus. In some cases, there may be room to provide deceleration and entry tapers using a combination of pavement markings. A taper of about 5:1, longitudinal to transverse, is a desirable minimum. When the stop is on the near or far side of an intersection, the width of the cross street is generally adequate for merging back into traffic or diverging to the bus stop, respectively. Keep in mind, however, that most transit operators prefer in-lane stops versus turn-outs due to the difficulties of through lane ingress from the turn-out. Bus stops located at the near side or far side of intersections provide pedestrian access from both sides of the street and connections to intersecting bus routes. The presence of curb extensions also facilitates passenger access. Additional discussion can be found in Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Report 19, Guidelines for the Location and Design of Bus Stops, ITE’s Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares: A Context Sensitive Approach, and agency guidance on bus stop placement and design. Guidelines for the Location and Design of Bus Stops provides additional information on the location and design of bus stops.72 Cross Section Transitions. The starting point and ending point of a Road Diet conversion may require a transition from or to a different cross section. The design of these locations is typically a function of the width of the lane to be dropped and the posted or design speed at the lane drop locations. The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices provides additional detail. Taper ratios for lane additions are typically around 15:1, longitudinal to transverse. Another important decision with respect to the cross section transitions that are part of the Road Diet is the location of the transitions. Overall, continuity of the two through lanes and one TWLTL lane is important, and transition points should occur at locations where the only decision a driver needs to make is related to the lane drop or addition. The objective when selecting a transition point location is to minimize the complexity of the transition area and the number of decisions or potential conflicts that could occur while a driver is merging or diverging. For this reason, transitions should not occur at or near intersections or major driveways (within their influence area). The Iowa guidelines further propose that Road Diet conversions should be questioned if additional through lanes are needed at the signalized intersections along the corridor. This type of transition may have a negative result on safety and lessen the benefits of the Road Diet conversion. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 397 Figure 23. Transition from 3-lane to 2-lane Cross Section, Oak Street, Merrifield, VA Photo Credit: Virginia DOT 37 Some transitions are less complicated than others. For example, the transition from a two-lane undivided roadway to a three-lane roadway is relatively simple and straightforward (see Figure 23). The general concerns noted above about the selection of transition point locations should still be taken into account. The transition from a four-lane undivided to a three-lane roadway requires dropping the outside through lanes in advance of the complete cross section conversion. This type of transition requires closer attention and involves the potential for through-vehicle conflicts. Overall, the lane drop and the introduction of the TWLTL should be installed in close proximity to each other. The transition from a five-lane roadway to a three-lane roadway is a similar situation but the introduction of a new TWLTL is not necessary. The same issues will also be encountered when transitioning from a three-lane roadway to some other type of cross section. Overall, it is also important to look at the roadway cross sections near the end of the “project limits” for a Road Diet conversion. The overall objective is to minimize the number of transitions within a short distance. In other words, it may sometimes be more appropriate to extend the “project limits” to avoid this situation. Through lanes should also not be dropped as a turn lane at an intersection. This type of lane drop is not good design. It will often “catch” vehicles that want to continue through the intersection and drivers may then make inappropriate maneuvers. 4.1.5 Intersection Design Basic principles of intersection design apply to intersections bordering or within the Road Diet area. Given the cross sectional change during Road Diet implementation, practitioners should perform a new operational analysis at each intersection (see Chapter 5). New lane arrangements and signal phasing are also possibilities, as discussed in other sections of this guide. The remainder of this section will include an overview of some design considerations for intersections bordering or within the Road Diet area with references to other documents as appropriate. Alignment and Profile of Intersection Approaches. Intersecting roads should meet at or nearly at right angles and the grades should be as flat as possible. These characteristics are likely predetermined at locations experiencing a Road Diet conversion, but designers should be aware of their negative effects on capacity, sight distance, and safety and look for opportunities to implement possible countermeasures. Intersection Sight Distance. Check intersection sight distance at each intersection bordering or within the Road Diet area. Drivers of approaching vehicles should have an unobstructed view of the entire intersection as well as sufficient lengths along the intersecting road to allow the observance and avoidance of potential conflicts with other vehicles. Drivers of stopped vehicles should also have a sufficient view of the intersecting highway to decide when to enter (with a left or right turn) or cross it. These design objectives are achieved by providing sight triangles. Approach and departure sight triangles are discussed in detail in AASHTO’s A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. It is likely that the sight distance needs for minor streets intersecting the new three-lane cross section decrease following the Road Diet conversion due to entering vehicles needing to cross fewer lanes. Other sections of this document also note how available sight distance for vehicles turning left from the TWLTL is likely greater than that along a four-lane, undivided cross section. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 398 38 State Laws Regarding Driver Use of TWLTLs Several states have enacted traffic laws that define and govern driver use of TWLTLs. The provisions of these laws vary widely, and most States do not appear to have enacted such traffic laws. Based on an Internet search of key terms related to “two way left turn lanes” and “center turn lanes”, the research team identified laws in 18 States that define and govern driver use of TWLTLs. Six types of laws were identified and are labeled “a” through “g” below. More than half of the 18 States specify the following: - (a) Where a TWLTL is provided, motorists may not turn left from any other lane - (b) Vehicle shall not be driven in a TWLTL except when preparing for or making a left turn/U-turn Ten States have enacted laws that (c) limit the distance a motorist may travel in a TWLTL – either a specified maximum distance, or the shortest distance practicable and safe, as summarized in Table 6: Table 6. Maximum Allowable Travel Distance in TWLTL Distance State 150 Feet Virginia 200 Feet California, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Rhode Island 300 Feet Georgia, Washington 500 Feet Missouri Shortest practicable distance/safe distance Maryland, Tennessee Four States have enacted laws that (d) stipulate that TWLTLs shall not be used for passing/overtaking another vehicle. Tennessee is unique in passing laws that specify the following: - (e) When vehicle enters turn lane, no other vehicle proceeding in opposite direction shall enter that turn lane if that entrance would prohibit the vehicle already in the lane from making the intended turn - (f) When vehicles enter the turn lane proceeding in opposite directions, the first vehicle to enter the lane shall have the right-of-way Arkansas is the only State to enact the following provision: - (g) It is permissible for vehicle making a left turn from an intersecting street or driveway to utilize TWLTL to gain access to or to merge into the traffic lanes, except not permissible to use the center left-turn lane as an acceleration lane In terms of guidelines, the six types of TWLTL laws identified in the 18 States provide reasonable instructions to drivers and can help promote safe driver actions on corridors with TWLTLs. Although it is unclear what factors or data the States used to determine the maximum allowable travel distance in TWLTL, limiting the distance drivers are permitted to travel in TWLTLs– if not overly restrictive– can enhance safety by reducing opportunities for opposing-direction crashes, as well as crashes involving pedestrians that use TWLTLs as a crossing refuge. One concern about stipulating short maximum travel distances is the risk of failing to account for the need for drivers to decelerate from highway speeds when entering TWLTLs. Regardless of the specific TWLTL laws enacted, it is suggested that State driver manuals define proper use of TWLTLs, including information regarding laws that govern TWLTLs. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 399 39 Right Turn Lanes. With the Road Diet conversion, it may be possible and desirable to provide an exclusive lane for right-turning traffic. The delay impact of vehicles turning right should be evaluated and a decision made about whether a right-turn lane is needed. Some cases may require additional right-of-way or pavement width. The volume of turning vehicles and the types of vehicles to be accommodated govern the widths of turning roadways. Always consider pedestrian safety when deciding whether to add a right-turn lane at intersections. If the right-turn lane is free flow, yield controlled, or if right turn on red is allowed at the intersection, then pedestrians will be affected. Turning radii are functions of turning speed and vehicle type. There are three types of designs for right-turning roadways at intersections: 1) minimum edge of traveled way, 2) design with a corner triangular island, and 3) free-flow design using a simple radius or compound radii. A detailed discussion is provided in AASHTO’s A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. Where pedestrians and bicyclists are present and trucks are only occasionally present, it may be desirable to use smaller turning radii to decrease the intersection area and reduce turning speeds. However, the designer should analyze likely turning paths and encroachments when a larger vehicle does use the intersection and its effect on traffic operations and safety. Depending on truck volumes, the typical size of trucks using the intersection, and nearby truck traffic generators, practitioners should consider larger radii to accommodate these road users. Driveway geometrics are also the focus of NCHRP 659 Guide for the Geometric Design of Driveways.73 The inside and outside turning radius of design vehicles should also be considered when the corridor being converted is not straight (e.g., the main designated route that is converted is two legs of an intersection that are at right angles to each other). Pavement marking and corner radii should be designed in combination to serve the left- and right-turn movement of the design vehicle at these locations. Roundabouts. A single-lane roundabout can be a good fit geometrically as part of a Road Diet installation. A roundabout will provide additional opportunities for improved safety by eliminating most angle and head-on crash types, and by reducing intersection operating speeds. Care should be taken, however, regarding public reaction to installing a Road Diet and roundabout(s) on the same corridor. Depending on public sentiment, adding a roundabout to the discussion could create additional concerns from nearby residents, business owners, and road users if they are not familiar with navigating roundabouts. Bicycle Design Considerations. Where the Road Diet includes on-street bicycle lanes, intersection designs should be modified accordingly. The bicycle facility should be carried up to and through the intersection. Where right- turn lanes are added, lane markings will be needed to channelize and separate bicycles from right-turning vehicles. Additional considerations include provisions for left-turn bicycle movements, use of bicycle boxes, and bicycle-specific traffic signals. Details related to these intersection design features are contained in AASHTO’s Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities and NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide. Curb Ramp Design. Pedestrian facilities must also accommodate all users, including those with mobility, vision, cognitive and other impairments. Curb ramps must land within the width of the pedestrian street crossing they serve, and wholly outside the parallel vehicle travel lane. A distinct curb ramp should be provided for each crossing direction. Where possible, aligning the curb ramp with the direction of the crosswalk is preferred. Keeping the curb radius small, including a buffer space between the sidewalk and the curb, and adding curb extensions are all strategies that aid in being able to achieve two distinct ramps at a corner that are compliant with the design requirements per the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Additional guidance on curb ramp design is available from the Draft Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines. While these guidelines are still in draft form, they and their successors are considered to be the leading guidance on the subject. Curb Extensions. On roadways with on-street parking, curb extensions at intersections can be added to shorten pedestrian crossing distances and make the pedestrian waiting at the corner more visible to drivers. Similarly, it gives the pedestrian a better view of oncoming traffic without having to step into the roadway. Curb extensions should only be used where on-street parking is permitted and should be slightly narrower than the parking lane, so that the extension is not bumping out into the traveled way for either bicyclists or motor vehicles. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 400 40 Other Pedestrian Design Considerations. Intersection design should facilitate safe and convenient crossings. Curb radii should be kept as low as practical in order to slow vehicle speeds as they turn. The radius will also impact the crossing distance, making it shorter as the radii get smaller. The addition of on-street parking or bicycle lanes may enable a smaller curb radii at intersections as the effective radius of the vehicle path gets larger with the separation from the curb that the parking and bike lanes provide. Additional discussion is provided in AASHTO’s Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities and FHWA’s Maintaining Pedestrian Facilities. 4.2 Operational Design The success of a Road Diet cross-section conversion is often based on whether the operation and safety of the roadway are maintained or improved for all road users. The operational impacts of a Road Diet conversion, as noted in previous chapters, can be relatively small if properly implemented in an appropriate location (e.g., a four-lane undivided roadway that already operates similar to a “de facto” three-lane roadway). Past experiences with this type of conversion, however, have also shown that there a number of decisions that users of these guidelines may want to consider closely before the design and implementation of a Road Diet conversion in order to increase its potential success. This section includes a brief description of some of the factors to consider in decisions related to: • Cross section allocation • Pedestrian crossings • Signalization changes • Transition points • Pavement marking and signing • Intersection design elements. The list above should not be considered exhaustive. Each corridor will have its own unique issues and needs. Engineering judgment and expertise need to be applied to each corridor design in order to respond to these situations. In addition, not all of the situations listed above are applicable to every corridor. The objective of this section, however, is to discuss the subjects above; note what has been learned in the past about how or why they need to be addressed; and, if applicable, identify some of the resources that could be used to respond appropriately. This section assumes that the Road Diet conversion option has already been selected through the input and involvement of all road users, adjacent land owners, and the appropriate public agencies and jurisdictions. 4.2.1 Cross-Section Allocation Road Diet conversions typically require the reallocation of the existing curb-to-curb or pavement-edge-to-pavement-edge distance, and the decision of how to allocate these distances can be complex. In fact, in many cases the Road Diet conversion option is selected because of its minimal impacts on the general “footprint” of the roadway and because there is typically no need for right-of-way acquisition (although spot locations of “widening” may occur). The reallocation of an existing cross section should take into account the objectives for the existing corridor as well as the needs of the road users it serves. In addition, practitioners must choose the type and width of each “lane.” The lane types along three lane roadways have included, but not been limited to, through lanes, TWLTLs, bike lanes, transit lanes, and parking lanes. Each corridor that is being converted should be individually evaluated and designed. Before installation, the TWLTL was used illegally for loading due to lack of other available space. Seattle DOT added “Load Zones” on Dexter Avenue in Seattle, Washington, to address delivery truck needs. In NCHRP Report 282, the authors suggest that there are situations with high left-turn volumes and lower through volumes in which conversion of a four-lane, undivided roadway to a three-lane cross section might be accomplished without lowering “operational efficiency.”74 In NCHRP Report 330 the authors suggest an eight-step process to select curb-to-curb cross section design alternatives.75 Both documents discuss the advantages and disadvantages of different cross-section designs. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 401 41 4.2.2 Crossing Pedestrians In some cases, pedestrians crossing a three-lane (or five-lane) roadway may use the TWLTL as an unofficial refuge area, which may result in conflicts with motorists who do not expect to see pedestrians in that travel lane. This issue can be mitigated with pedestrian refuge islands. Pedestrian refuge islands should be used with caution, and care should be taken with their design, because they introduce a potential obstacle for vehicles in the TWLTL. Corner or midblock curb bulb outs can reduce the length of the pedestrian crossing, and this may also allow a reduction in signal timing to serve pedestrians. Care should be taken in the design of the bulb out. Bulb outs should not extend into the path of a bicyclist and, therefore, are best used in conjunction with on-street parking. Also consider the reduction in turning radius at intersections if a pedestrian bulb out is installed. The addition of a pedestrian refuge island at an intersection may also result in the need for more pavement width. There are a number of other measures that can also be applied to improve the experience of crossing pedestrians. One reference that includes a discussion of several pedestrian crossing treatments at unsignalized locations is TCRP Report 112/NCHRP Report 562 Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings (a guideline for pedestrian crossing treatments is in the appendix).76 Another resource that may be of value is the AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities.77 The FHWA webpage for Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety also includes many resources – including an article entitled Proven Countermeasures for Pedestrian Safety in the March/April 2012 issue of Public Roads .78 4.2.3 Intersection Control Changes Re-evaluate traffic signal phasing and timing when converting a four-lane undivided roadway to three lanes. Perform an operational analysis to evaluate the acceptability of the potential impacts of the existing and proposed cross section and signalization on major and minor street vehicle and pedestrian delay and queue lengths. This evaluation should also consider the potential impact of heavy vehicles. In general, signal timing and phasing, along with the type and number of lanes on all intersection approaches, may need to be altered to minimize the operational impact of the Road Diet conversion. Specifically, mainline traffic may need additional green time due to the lane capacity reduction, especially during peak hours, to maintain mainline level of service. This could increase side-street delay during those time periods. It is also important to adjust the positioning of the signal heads for a Road Diet conversion so the signal heads align with the new lane configuration, and there is a minimum of one signal head installed over each traffic lane. The reader is referred to the signalization information in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), particularly Part 4, which focuses on highway traffic signals and includes a discussion of pedestrian controls. The signing needed for signalized locations is also contained in the MUTCD. Another document that may be of value to the readers is the FHWA Signalized Intersections Informational Guide. The FHWA intersection safety website also includes a number of resources. Experience has indicated that it may not be appropriate to complete a Road Diet conversion when new signalization locations are needed along the same corridor. This is especially true if a Road Diet conversion is a new option within a jurisdiction. In general, it is important for the road users to understand what type of delays, if any, may be due to the Road Diet conversion. The source of additional delays is not clear when a Road Diet conversion is implemented along with new signalization location(s). Each corridor is unique, however, and the success of a Road Diet conversion is based on the objectives for each roadway. The two improvements might also be implemented separately (e.g., the signalization could be done before or after the Road Diet conversion). Roundabouts can be considered as well. In some cases a mini-roundabout will fit within the existing right-of-way and footprint of the previously stop-controlled or signalized intersection. Roundabouts can provide operational improvements to the intersection by reducing queues and providing more consistent flow. Additional information is available in NCHRP Report 672, Roundabouts Informational Guide, 2nd Edition. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 402 42 4.2.4 Pavement Marking and Signing The signing and markings for a three-lane roadway should follow the requirements and suggestions in the MUTCD. Many of the parts in the current MUTCD apply to three-lane roadways (e.g., Parts 2, 3, 4, 9). These parts focus on signing (e.g., regulatory, warning, and guide), pavement markings (e.g., lane lines, edge lines, and the TWLTL), signals, bicycles, and pedestrians. It is necessary to provide proper pavement markings and signing for, among other things, the TWLTL, right-turn lanes, pedestrian crossings, and refuge islands. Pavement markings can also be used to properly position both stopped and turning vehicles so they can safely make turning maneuvers. The proper positioning (e.g., at a stop line) and turning radius of the design vehicle should be considered. Edge lines and/or parking space pavement markings may also sometimes be used to position through vehicles. Finally, if a Road Diet conversion only involves the re-marking of lane lines along an existing roadway cross section, it is extremely important that the old pavement markings are completely removed. More than one Road Diet conversion has resulted in unintended consequences and driver confusion because “ghost markings” (remnants of paint or other material) remained after implementation. 4.2.5 Intersection Design Elements Intersection design guidance may also be found in the AASHTO Green Book and local or State roadway design guidance documents. The guidance contained in these documents should be followed when designing a three-lane roadway. Agencies considering a Road Diet may want to consider several intersection design elements, including traffic signalization, corner radii, and offset intersections. Traffic Signalization. The signalization discussion in this chapter noted that timing, phasing, and approach lane arrangements may need to be adjusted with a Road Diet conversion. Minor street volumes are a critical input to this activity. More generally, the potential impacts of the conversion on traffic entering and exiting all minor streets and driveways need to be closely evaluated. The delay and queuing changes that may occur due to changes in signalization timing and phasing, and the availability of adequate gaps for minor street or driveway traffic (at unsignalized locations), should be well understood. Practitioners should quantify and compare any additional delays and queues to what is considered acceptable along the corridor of interest. The delay, safety, and through-vehicle impacts of vehicles backing on to the converted roadway should also be discussed. Corner Radii. Corner radii and right-turn lanes are both part of intersection design. Right-turn lanes may need to be added along three-lane roadways at intersections and major driveways. Evaluate the delay impact of vehicles turning right and decide if a right-turn lane is needed. Some cases may require additional right-of-way or pavement width. Practitioners should consider the radii or turning radius of the design vehicle at each corridor intersection and driveway. The AASHTO Green Book includes information about the proper design of turn lanes and corner radii. Driveway geometrics are also the focus of NCHRP 659, Guide for the Geometric Design of Driveways .79 The inside and outside turning radius of design vehicles should also be considered when the corridor being converted is not straight (e.g., the main designated route that is converted is two legs of an intersection that are at right angles to each other). Design pavement markings and corner radii in combination to serve the left- and right-turn movement of the design vehicle at these locations. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 403 Figure 24. Offset Driveways Causing Conflict Points in the TWLTL Source: FHWA-SA-10-002 43 Offset Intersections and Driveways. Lastly, it is important to understand the impact of offset intersections and high-volume driveways on turning and through traffic. Operational and safety concerns may be introduced if there is a significant amount of “through” traffic on an offset minor street or major driveways. If the offset is oriented so that the minor street or driveway “through” vehicles turn right onto the main roadway, there is a greater possibility that opposing vehicles may want to travel in the TWLTL for an intersection or driveway offset distance. This situation occurs when one of the minor street vehicles entering the mainline may stop in the TWLTL and negatively impact other vehicles or make another unsafe maneuver.80 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 404 442016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 405 45 Post-implementation evaluation of the Road Diet will determine safety, operational, and livability impacts. Impacts associated with roadway conversions include the following: • Safety (e.g., crash frequency/type/severity, pedestrian-vehicle conflicts) • Travel speeds (e.g., average travel time, mean/85th percentile speeds, percent of vehicles traveling at high speeds) • Ar terial level of service, delay, queuing • Intersection operations (e.g., turn delays; v/c ratios; signal operations) • Traffic volume, including diversion to parallel routes • Corridor operations including transit operations and similar, the two-way left-turn lane operations, and the ability to evaluate “stopped traffic” in one through lane • Pedestrian and bicycle safety and operations • Economic impact / livability. For example, Seattle DOT conducts follow-up studies after implementation to determine the effects on each treated corridor. Specifically, the department compares the before-and-after conditions for the following:81 • Volume of the principal street's peak hour capacity • Speed and collisions • Traffic signal level of service • Volume of traffic on parallel arterials • Travel times • Bicycle volumes. 5.1 Safety Analysis of a Road Diet The process of implementing significant (and often controversial) changes in roadway geometry such as Road Diets often incorporates a formal safety evaluation plan to assess crash effects and other safety impacts. 5.1.1 Data Needs Practitioners typically use police-reported crashes for periods before and after changes have been implemented to conduct observational before-and-after studies. Typically a minimum of 3 years of crash data before and after treatment is preferred, although shorter time periods may be used to assess initial crash outcomes. Crash data can either come from State or local police agencies, State or local DOTs, or State DMV offices. In addition to crash data, traffic volume data is desirable to account for vehicle exposure, thus allowing the safety analysis to compute crash rates before and after treatment. Beyond crash studies, safety analysis can include field evaluations of pedestrian-vehicle conflicts and bicycle-vehicle conflicts, in which case the data needs include well-defined and reliably collected observational measures of road user behavior. 5 Determining if the Road Diet is Effective 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 406 46 Two basic types of observational evaluations are used to estimate associated safety impacts:82 Before-and-After Studies. Observational before-and-after studies are the most common approach used in safety effectiveness evaluation. An observational before-and-after study requires crash data and volume data from both before and after implementation. These studies can be conducted for any site where changes have been made; however, if a site was selected for an improvement because of an unusually high short-term crash frequency, evaluating this site may introduce the regression- to-the mean (RTM) bias. It is likely that even if no improvement was made, the crash experience would decrease (regress to the mean). Thus, RTM effects can be mistaken for the effects of crash countermeasures. Empirical Bayes techniques account for the effect of regression-to-the mean, but require appropriate statistical knowledge to apply.83 The Highway Safety Manual has been developed to assist practitioners and researchers to conduct robust observational before-after studies that provide results to support decision-making.84 Cross-Sectional Studies. Cross-sectional studies involve studying a treatment where there are few sites where a treatment was implemented, but there are many sites that are similar except they do not have the identified treatment. In some cases, evaluations have been performed only after the fact, and all data were not available for the performance measure during the before period. In such cases, cross-sectional studies may be necessary. These studies might also be necessary when the evaluation needs to account explicitly for effects of roadway geometrics or other related features by creating a CMF function rather than a single value for a CMF. Limitations exist when using a cross-sectional study; for example, confidence in the results may not be high since trends over time are not taken into account, and the inability to account for RTM, which threatens the validity of the results, especially if treated sites were selected because they were identified as high-crash locations. The Highway Safety Manual has been developed to assist practitioners and researchers to conduct robust cross-sectional studies. 5.1.2 Observational Before-and-After Studies of Road Diets This section focuses on observational before-and-after studies, which are most applicable to State and local evaluations of Road Diet implementations. A before-and-after study is used to estimate the crash effects associated with implementation of a traffic safety measure such as a Road Diet. The change in crash occurrence is estimated from the change in crash frequency between the periods before and after the implementation of the Road Diet. Before-and-after safety analyses can also consider changes in crash rates, which account for estimated traffic volumes during the before and after periods. Crash outcomes associated with Road Diet implementation can include the following: • Change in the annual number of crashes on the corridor • Change in the crash rate per million vehicle miles traveled • Change in the severity of crashes that occur (e.g., percent of crashes that involve either any type of injury, or serious injuries) • Change in certain targeted crash type(s) associated with Road Diet implementation • Sideswipe • Lef t-turn related • Pedestrian-related or bicycle-related • Right angle • Changes in the number of crashes occurring during the peak-hours. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 407 47 To account for changes in crashes unrelated to the safety treatment (e.g., overall traffic volume trends, changes in traffic laws, weather, economic conditions), a proper before-and-after study should incorporate an untreated comparison group that is similar in nature to the treatment group. For a before-and-after evaluation of a Road Diet, the comparison group might be comprised of one or more similar, untreated (four-lane, undivided) roads located in the same geographic region. When planning a comparison group before-and-after safety evaluation, it is important to include a sufficient number of crashes to enable the expected change in safety to be statistically detectable. Four variables impact the sample size requirements: 1. The size of the treatment group, in terms of the number of crashes in the before period 2. The relative duration of the before and after periods 3. The likely crash reduction (CR) value (expected crash reduction or desirable reduction) 4. The size of the comparison group in terms of the number of crashes in the before and after periods. After the treatment and comparison sites have been identified and the before-and-after crash data assembled, the next step is to conduct the crash analysis. A number of methodologies and statistical procedures are available to analyze before-and-after crash data. These range in complexity and ease of use. Note that some basic forms of before-and-after studies (e.g., naïve before/ after, before/after with yoked pairs) are not recommended due to issues with the statistical soundness of results. Observational Before-and-After Evaluation Using a Comparison Group. Observational before-and-after studies can incorporate non-treatment sites into the evaluation by using a comparison group (or control sites). A comparison group typically consists of non-treated sites that are comparable in traffic volume, geometrics, and other site characteristics to the treated sites but which do not have the improvement being evaluated. Crash and traffic volume data should be collected for the same time period for both the treated sites and the comparison group.85 Safety data analysis statistical techniques are available to address regression-to-the-mean and other limitations of before-and- after evaluations. Regression-to-the-mean is the natural variation in crash data. If regression-to-the-mean is not accounted for, the conclusions of a before-and-after study could be erroneous. Many of the methods in the Highway Safety Manual account for regression-to-the-mean and can result in more effectively identifying the safety effect of installing a Road Diet on a particular corridor.86 Empirical Bayes (EB) Before-and-After Safety Evaluation Method. From the Highway Safety Manual, “[This] method can be used to compare crash frequencies at a group of sites before and after a treatment is implemented. The EB method explicitly addresses the regression-to-the-mean issue by incorporating crash information from other but similar sites into the evaluation. This is done by using a Safety Performance Function (SPF) and weighting the observed crash frequency with the SPF-predicted average crash frequency to obtain an expected average crash frequency.”87 Recommended data include 10-20 sites at which the treatment has been implemented, 3-5 years of before-installation crash and traffic volume data, 3-5 years of after-installation crash and traffic volume data, and Safety Performance Functions for the treatment site types. 5.1.3 Surrogate Measures of Safety for Road Diets In addition to conducting formal safety assessments of Road Diets using data-driven analysis techniques based on pre- and post- installation crash data, surrogate measures of safety can provide valuable feedback to State and local agencies regarding both actual and perceived safety outcomes. A surrogate measure of safety can provide information on the level of safety of a location or system using information other than crash data. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 408 48 Traffic Conflicts. One such surrogate measure involves the analysis of traffic conflicts before and after Road Diets are implemented. A traffic conflict is defined as a traffic event involving the interaction of two or more road users, at least one of whom takes evasive action such as braking or swerving to avoid a collision.88 Examples of pedestrians taking evasive action to avoid crashes include pedestrians jumping back or running out of the way of an approaching vehicle. A traffic conflict survey is a systematic method of observing and recording traffic conflicts and other events associated with safety and operations. With regard to conducting conflict analyses for Road Diets, agencies might focus on before-after changes in the numbers/rates of rear-end conflicts, sideswipe conflicts, and motor vehicle conflicts involving pedestrians and bicyclists. Speed. Both speed magnitude and speed variability can have an effect on safety and, in the absence of observational crash data, provide information to determine relative safety of the corridor. Because high travel speeds increase the risk of crashes as well as crash severity, it is important to determine whether Road Diets help to reduce speeding. Likewise, because inconsistent travel speeds between vehicles can increase the risk of rear-end and sideswipe crashes, it is important to determine whether Road Diets help to reduce speed variation. Level of Comfort. Another surrogate measure of safety involves “level of comfort,” a subjective measure which is especially applicable for bicyclists and pedestrians for Road Diet projects. The concept of road user comfort in transportation engineering is not new. For example, the parameters used to establish the minimum horizontal curve radius are the maximum side friction factor and maximum rate of superelevation. Values for the maximum side friction factor are based on driver comfort, not on physical side friction supply and demand relationships. The result is a significant “margin of safety.”89 With regard to assessing the level of comfort for Road Diets, options include conducting systematic visual assessments of pedestrian and bicyclist interaction with motor vehicles and conducting interviews with sufficient samples of non-motorized road users. 5.2 Operational Analysis The operational effects of Road Diets have been summarized to some degree, but the research is limited to a relatively small number of publications. The literature shows that a properly located and designed Road Diet can result in maintained traffic operations. The general objective of this section will be to discuss ways in which Road Diet operation can be measured. 5.2.1 Analyzing Vehicle Operations Traffic Volumes. Before-and-after studies should examine if changes occur in daily traffic and peak hour traffic. Evaluate potential changes to determine if there was diversion as a result of a Road Diet installation or if variations from year to year may be the result of background traffic changes. A broader downturn in the economy may result in lower traffic volumes, but patterns going back several years should also be examined for longer-term trends. Level of Service. Evaluate the level of service of arterial segments and intersections. The facility type that carries the most leverage is based on factors such as signal spacing and segment length. For intersections, the overall LOS should be considered, but the analysis should also drill down to determine how LOS changes for individual movements at an intersection approach. Consider the LOS guidelines for each jurisdiction when determining whether a certain level of vehicular LOS degradation is acceptable. This requires weighing safety benefits as well as improved LOS or QOS for pedestrians and bicyclists. Corridor LOS is generally determined by traffic flow. Intersection LOS is measured by average vehicle delay. Speed. Practitioners should evaluate the actual speed change (if any) as a result of the Road Diet. Data are collected through the use of before-and-after speed studies using radar, tubes or a pace car. It is important to collect and compare average speed, 85th percentile speed and speed paces in 10 mph increments. This last group is important to determine if the number of high-end speeders has been reduced. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 409 49 Two-Way Left-Turn Lane Operation. The addition of a TWLTL will improve operations for through vehicles by removing turning vehicle from the through lane and reducing the uncertainty it causes. Left turning traffic may have additional delay since all through vehicles are in one lane, which could result in fewer gaps. This depends on gaps created by traffic signal timing, on- street parking maneuvers, and vehicles stopping for pedestrians crossing the street. Queue Lengths. This measure is closely related to signalized intersection LOS described above. It may increase due to only one through lane, but this could be offset due to left turning vehicles no longer queuing in a through lane. Signal spacing needs to be considered so that queues do not extend to the upstream intersection. This may only be a concern for higher volume corridors with closely spaced signalized intersections. Modeling the before and after conditions can provide guidance as to expectations relating to vehicle queue lengths. Signalized intersections in the corridor may need to be re-timed to provide optimal progression. Trucks, Slow-Moving Vehicles, and Buses . Reducing the number of through lanes from two to one in each direction may create an impact if there are grade changes or if heavy vehicles such as buses, semi-trucks or farm equipment are present. Bus stop placement and the transit policy for whether or not to stop in-lane is also a consideration for Road Diet operation. Give special consideration to these heavy vehicles driving through a corridor and also using the Road Diet corridor circulation to side streets. This is described further in the section below. Turning Traffic. The Road Diet may make it easier for larger vehicles to make right turns with small curb radii by increasing the effective radius due to the addition of a bike lane. The vehicle mix needs to be considered for each location. Some intersections may not need to accommodate larger semi-truck traffic as they may only be present at such an infrequent interval that it is not an issue. The land use type and demand for smaller single unit type vehicles should also be considered. 5.2.2 Non-Motorized Operations Non-motorized operations can be measured with respect to pedestrian accessibility and bicyclist use along the corridor. Three studies reported increased bicycle and pedestrian usage along the corridor after a Road Diet conversion.90, 91, 92 Pedestrian Wait Time. Study the wait time for pedestrians crossing at unsignalized intersections and pedestrian “comfort” with crossing the corridor. A before-and-after study of pedestrian crossing behavior can be challenging because many pedestrians may avoid crossing a four-lane undivided arterial due to the level of discomfort or perceived safety issues. Pedestrians may choose to cross exclusively at signalized intersections if there are few gaps in traffic. Vehicle Yield/Stop Compliance Rate for Pedestrians Crossing the Street. The Road Diet eliminates the risk of the “multiple vehicle threat” pedestrians can face when crossing two lanes of traffic traveling in the same direction. The term describes a scenario in which the first vehicle stops for the pedestrian but a vehicle in the second adjacent lane does not or fails to see the pedestrian in enough time to stop. The prevalence of this problem can be measured in the before and after conditions. Increased Bicyclist and Pedestrian Volumes. Pedestrians and bicyclists may avoid traveling on a four-lane undivided arterial due to discomfort or perceived safety concerns with no dedicated bicycle lanes or pedestrian facilities. They may switch to a street that has been reconfigured due to increased comfort or perception of improved safety that clearly delineated bicycle lanes and pedestrian facilities (e.g., sidewalks, fewer lanes to cross, or pedestrian refuge islands) can provide. Some bicyclists may not find a bike lane adjacent to a vehicle lane comfortable enough, which is why the use of a buffered bicycle lane or protected lane is advisable when the street cross section provides enough room. The buffering can come in the form of either a painted barrier between the bike lane and the vehicle lane, a raised barrier, or, in some cases, by placing the bike lane against the curb and placing the parking lane between the bike lane and the vehicle through lane. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 410 50 5.2.3 Tools and Methods to Evaluate Impacts Input Requirements. The data needed for this analysis consists of intersection turning movement counts, daily traffic volumes by direction, and operating speed information. If these volumes have been observed to create delay in the before condition, visually observe delays caused by mid-block, left-turning traffic at driveways. The physical characteristics and complexity of corridor determine how detailed the analysis should be; some corridors may only require corridor analysis while others will need analysis of signalized intersection operations. The traffic volume along the corridor, transit operations, and the number of access points will all help determine whether the analysis procedures presented in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual are sufficient or whether a macro- (such as Synchro) or micro-level computer simulation (such as VISSIM) is needed to determine the projected outcome of a Road Diet. Output Provided. The output provided will depend on the tool used for analysis. The factors to consider depend on the type of analysis and the questions posed. Complexities with Analyzing Three-lane Sections. The intersection analysis should be straightforward, but practitioners must ensure field conditions are accurately analyzed between signalized intersections, too. Some of the factors to consider are parallel parking maneuvers using a through lane, buses maneuvering into and out of a bus stop (whether it is along the curb or in the lane), left-turning vehicles (from stopping in the through lane to slowing to enter the two-way, left-turn lane), cross-street traffic looking for a gap to turn or cross the arterial, and pedestrians crossing the street at unsignalized intersections. It is helpful to observe the corridor operating conditions in the four-lane, undivided configuration to determine a “baseline” condition and see where existing conflict points are and what causes them prior to evaluating the corridor in the “after” condition to determine how overall conditions have changed. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 411 51 The most common Road Diet involves converting an existing four-lane, undivided roadway segment to a three-lane segment consisting of two through lanes and a center two-way, left-turn lane (TWLTL). Road Diets can be used to address safety concerns with four-lane, undivided highways associated with relatively high crash rates as traffic volumes increase and as the inside lane is shared by high-speed and left-turning vehicles. The reduction of lanes allows the roadway cross section to be reallocated for other uses such as bike lanes, pedestrian refuge islands, or parking.90 The benefits of Road Diets include improved safety, traffic calming, and the opportunity to repurpose segments of the roadway to create on-street parking, bike lanes, or transit stops. Based on the history of safety studies presented in this guide, practitioners can expect a crash reduction of 19 to 47 percent after installing a Road Diet. Variables include pre-installation crash history, installation details, and the urban or rural nature of the corridor. When planning for or designing a Road Diet, it is important to be aware of the opportunities and potential drawbacks that one type of treatment may have on other travel modes. When deciding whether a particular element is appropriate for an individual street, or whether a Road Diet in general is appropriate, the surrounding context should be taken into consideration, including the extended roadway network. Each decision will have to be made on a case-by-case basis and will depend on the desired operation of the street in question. Consider coordinating with non-motorized advocacy groups, transit agencies, freight stakeholders, and emergency responders as necessary to understand their needs through the design of a Road Diet. Common feasibility factors include the following: • The need for improved safety for all road users • A desire to incorporate context sensitive solutions and Complete Streets features • Operational considerations, such as: o Whether the existing roadway operates as a de facto three-lane roadway o The need for reduced speed or traffic calming o Average daily traffic o Multimodal level of service o Peak hour volumes and peak direction o Turning volumes and patterns o The presence of slow-moving or frequently stopping vehicles, such as transit, curb-side mail delivery, and others • A desire to better accommodate bicycles, pedestrians, and transit service • Right-of-Way availability and cost • The existence of parallel roadways, parallel parking, and at-grade railroad crossings. • Public outreach, public relations, and political considerations. 6 Conclusion 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 412 52 Geometric and operational design features are important during the design of a Road Diet reconfiguration. Geometric design includes identifying details of the project in plan, profile, and cross-section. Important issues include overarching principles of design, design controls, design elements, cross-section design, intersection design, and consideration for all road users. The following list represents just a few of the geometric design considerations one should consider during the Road Diet design phase: • Road functional classification • Design vehicles, driver characteristics, and presence of non-motorized users • Corridor sight distance, grade, horizontal curvature, and superelevation • Cross-sectional elements, such as lane widths, cross slope, presence of curbs or shoulders, access management, and presence of on-street parking or bus turnouts • Intersection design elements, such as alignment and profile of intersection approaches and intersection sight distance. Practitioners must make a number of operational decisions as well, including cross-section allocation, pedestrian accommodations, signalization changes, transition points, and pavement marking and signing. As with any roadway treatment, data analysis and engineering judgment are required to determine whether a Road Diet is the most appropriate alternative in a given situation. Once implemented, it is important to evaluate the effectiveness of the Road Diet. This typically occurs through studying pre- and post-installation crash data, operating speeds, and operational level of service. Additional tools and methods, both specific and general, should be used to evaluate conversion impacts, including the following: • Safety (e.g., crash frequency/type/severity, pedestrian-vehicle conflicts) • Travel speeds (e.g., average travel time, mean/85th percentile speeds, percent of vehicles traveling at high speeds) • Ar terial level of service, delay, queuing • Intersection operations (e.g., turn delays; volume/capacity ratios; signal operations) • Traffic volume, including diversion to parallel routes • Corridor operations including transit operations and similar, the two-way left-turn lane operations, and the ability to evaluate “stopped traffic” in one through lane • Pedestrian and bicycle safety and operations • Economic impact / livability. In conclusion, a Road Diet can be a low-cost safety solution when the installation is coordinated with scheduled pavement marking modifications or planned in conjunction with reconstruction or simple overlay projects. Road Diets have the potential to solve a number of traffic operations and safety issues and to incorporate non-motorized users when applied at the most appropriate locations. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 413 53 Appendix A – Road Diet Safety Assessment Studies The following table provides an overview of recent Road Diet safety analyses, including the number of treatment sites, traffic volume, and key safety results. Following that are synopses for each reference. Reference Treatment Sites ADT Key Safety Results FHWA, 2010 45 sites in California, Iowa, and Washington 3,718 to 26,376Iowa data: 47% reduction in total crashes California and Washington data: 19% reduction in total crashes Combined data: 29% reduction in total crashes Noyce et al., 2006 7 treatment sites throughout Minnesota8,900 to 17,400Traditional before-after approach: 42- 43% reduction in crashes. Yoked/group comparison analysis: 37% reduction in total crashes and 47% reduction in crash rates. EB approach: 44% reduction in total crashes. Pawlovich et al., 200615 treatment sites throughout Iowa 4,766 to 13,695 25.2% reduction in crash frequency per mile; 18.8% reduction in crash rate. Li and Carriquiry, 2005 15 treatment sites throughout Iowa 3,007 to 15,333 29% reduction in the frequency of crashes per mile; 18% reduction in the crash rate. Huang et al., 2003 12 treatment sites in California and Washington 10,179 to 16,0706% reduction in total crashes relative to control; no reduction in crash rate. Lyles et al., 2012 24 treatment sites throughout Michigan3,510 to 17,0209% reduction in total crashes (non- significant). Stout, 2005 Stout et al., 2005 Stout (year unknown) 11 to 15 treatment sites in various Iowa cities 2,000 to 17,40021 to 38 percent reduction in total crashes; similar reduction in crash rates. Clark, 2001 One treatment site in Athens-Clarke County, GA 18,000 to 20,000 52.9% reduction in total crashes; 51.1% reduction in crash rate (first 6 months). City of Orlando, 2002 One treatment site in Orlando, FL 18,000 to 20,000 34% reduction in crash rate; 68% reduction in injury rate (first 4 months). Preston, 1999 Minnesota Not Provided 27% lower crash rate on three-lane roads than on four-lane undivided roadways (cross-sectional comparison – not a before-after study) 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 414 54 The table below provides additional details for these Road Diet safety assessments. Reference FHWA. 2010. Evaluation of Lane Reduction “Road Diet” Measures on Crashes. FHWA Report No. FHWA- HRT-10-053. Location 45 treatment sites in California, Iowa, and Washington ADT 3,718 – 26,376 Safety Analysis MethodThe empirical Bayes (EB) methodology was used to estimate the change in total crashes. Reported Safety EffectsThe EB evaluation of total crash frequency indicated a statistically significant effect of the Road Diet treatment in both data sets and when the results are combined. The Iowa data indicate a 47% reduction in total crashes while the California and Washington data indicate a 19% decrease. Combining both data sets results in a 29% reduction in total crashes. Comments This is arguably the strongest crash-based evaluations of Road Diet implementation. Two likely reasons the results differ from the original Iowa results (below) is that the re-analysis involved a much larger reference group than was used in the original study, and the re-analysis provided more weight to longer sites (while the original study weighted all treatment sites equally regardless of length). Differences between the IA sites and those in CA/WA may be a function of traffic volumes and characteristics of the urban environments where the Road Diets were implemented. AADT for the IA sites ranged from 3,718 to 13,908 and were predominately on U.S. or State routes passing through small towns; AADT for the sites in CA and WA ranged from 6,194 to 26,376 and were predominately on corridors in suburban environments that surrounded larger cities. Sites with lower crash reduction factors (CRFs) generally had higher traffic volumes, suggesting the possibility of diminishing safety benefits as traffic volumes increase. The authors recommended that the choice of which CRF to use should be based on characteristics of the site being considered. If the proposed treatment site is more like the small-town Iowa sites, then the 47% reduction found in IA should be used. If the treatment site is part of a corridor in a suburban area of a larger city, then the 19% reduction should be used. If the proposed site matches neither of these site types, then the combined 29% reduction is most appropriate. Reference Noyce, D.A.; Talada, V.; and Gates T.J. 2006. Safety and Operational Characteristics of Two-Way Left-Turn Lanes. Minnesota DOT Report No. MN/RC 2006-25. Location 7 treatment sites throughout Minnesota ADT 8,900 – 17,400 Safety Analysis MethodCrash data were first analyzed using traditional approaches involving a comparison of the before and after crashes. Crash data were also analyzed by yoked/group comparison analysis and the empirical Bayes (EB) approach. Reported Safety EffectsThe traditional before-and-after approach estimated a reduction in total crashes between 42 and 43%. A yoked/group comparison analysis found a 37% reduction in total crashes and a 46% reduction in PDO crashes (both statistically significant). The reductions in crash rates (per vehicle mile traveled) were 47% for total crashes and 45% for PDO crashes (both statistically significant). The empirical Bayes (EB) approach estimated a 44% reduction in total crashes. Comments This is one of the stronger crash-based evaluations of Road Diet implementation, although the number of treatment sites (7) is small. One limitation of the authors’ use of the empirical Bayes (EB) approach involves the relatively small group of reference sites (17). By comparison, the EB analysis by FHWA (2010) summarized 296 reference sites. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 415 55 Reference Pawlovich, M.D.; Li, W.; Carriquiry, A.; and Welch, T.M. 2006. Iowa’s Experience with “Road Diet” Measures: Impacts on Crash Frequencies and Crash Rates Assessed Following a Bayesian Approach. TR Record Issue Number 1953 Location 15 treatment sites throughout Iowa ADT 4,766 to 13,695 Safety Analysis MethodA before-and-after study implemented from a Bayesian perspective to assess crash history effects. The study used both monthly crash data and estimated volumes over 23 years (1982 to 2004). Crash data were analyzed at each site before and after the conversions were completed. Reported Safety EffectsResults indicate a 25.2% (23.2% to 27.8%) reduction in crash frequency per mile and an 18.8% (17.9% to 20.0%) reduction in crash rate. The values in parentheses represent the 95% confidence interval. Comments This is a relatively strong crash-based evaluation of Road Diet implementation. The methodology is a refinement from the 2005 study by Li and Carriquiry. Unlike the use of linear regression models to estimate expected crash frequencies, this study allowed for different slopes during the “before” and the “after” periods by including a change-point in the model and for the interaction of treatment and slope. As a result, the model allows for a slight increase in crash frequency during the months immediately preceding and following the conversion. The number of comparison sites (15) is much smaller than the number of reference sites (296) used in the EB analysis performed by FHWA (2010). Reference Li, W. and Carriquiry, A. 2005. The Effect of Four-Lane to Three-Lane Conversion on the Number of Crashes and Crash Rates in Iowa Roads. Department of Statistics, Iowa State University. Location 15 treatment sites throughout Iowa ADT 3,007 – 15,333 Safety Analysis MethodThe authors assessed the effectiveness of the four to three lane conversion by comparing the average expected annual crash frequency per mile during years preceding and following the conversion at the site level and also as an average over all sites in each of the two groups (Road Diets and comparison sites). Reported Safety EffectsIn general, with elapsed time, the expected number of crashes per mile at each site in the treatment group continues to decrease faster than the number at the corresponding paired site in the control group. For all treatment sites combined, the frequency of crashes per mile decreased an estimated 34.8%, from 23 pre-treatment to 15 post-treatment, whereas the crash frequency per mile for control sites decreased 6.2%, from 16 pre to 15 post. This would suggest an estimated 29% net reduction in the frequency of crashes per mile associated with the Road Diet treatments. For all treatment sites combined, the annual crash rate per 100MVMT decreased an estimated 43.9%, from 792 pre-treatment to 442 post, whereas the crash rate for control sites decreased 25.5%, from 652 pre to 486 post. This would suggest an estimated 18% net reduction in the crash rate per 100MVMT associated with the Road Diet treatments. Comments While the results suggest that traffic safety is significantly improved by converting four lane roads to three lanes, there was significant variability in crash numbers across sites. It is not clear how much of an impact the wide range in ADT (3,007 – 15,333) had on the overall safety analysis. The suitability of the control sites may be questionable given markedly lower crash frequencies and crash rates at the control sites compared with the treatment sites, pre-intervention. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 416 56 Reference Huang, H.; Stewart, J. R.; Zegeer, C.; and Tan Esse; C. 2003. How Much Do You Lose When Your Road Goes on a Diet? Submitted to the 2nd Urban Street Symposium. Location 12 treatment sites in California and Washington ADT 10,179 to 16,070 pre-conversion Safety Analysis MethodThe authors conducted before-and-after analysis using a yoked comparison study of the Road Diet and comparison sites. Further analysis used a negative binomial model controlling for possible changes in ADT, study period, and other factors. Reported Safety EffectsAfter accounting for trends at comparison sites, the number of crashes at Road Diet sites in the after period declined by about 6%. Crash rates, however, did not change significantly from the “before” period to the “after” period. Comments Although the authors identified 30 Road Diets and 50 comparison sites in 8 cities, it is unclear why only 12 treatment sites and 25 comparison sites were included in this paper. ADTs were not available for some treatment and comparison sites, and some of the ADTs were of “questionable accuracy.” The selection of comparison sites is a key function of the yoked comparison study design, and little information is provided regarding the criteria used to select comparison sites. Reference Lyles, R.; Siddiqui, M.A.; Taylor, W.; Malik, B.; Siviy, G.; and Haan, T. 2012. Safety and Operational Analysis of four- lane to three-lane Conversions (Road Diets) in Michigan. Michigan DOT Report Number RC-1555 Location 24 treatment sites throughout Michigan ADT 3,510 – 17,020 Safety Analysis MethodSimple before-and-after crash analysis adjusted for trends of an untreated comparison group. Reported Safety EffectsAverage CMFs, adjusted for citywide trends, were calculated across all 24 sites. The result was that the overall naïve (unadjusted) CMF was estimated as 0.63, and 0.91 after adjustment. While the best estimate of a usable CMF is 0.91, this is not statistically different from 1.0 and is an average across all sites. Perhaps more importantly, there is a great deal of variation from site to site. Comments The analysis was limited by the fact that good/acceptable comparison sites could be identified for only a few of the 24 sites. The authors caution that Road Diets should not be “oversold” with respect to expected benefits, especially safety benefits. Actual benefits of a Road Diet can vary significantly by site. Reference Stout, T.B. 2005. Before and After Study of Some Impacts of Four-lane to Three-lane Roadway Conversions. Unpublished paper: Iowa State University. Stout, T.B; Pawlovich, M.; Souleyrette, R.R.; and Carriquiry, A. 2005. Safety Impacts of “Road Diets” in Iowa. Unpublished paper: Iowa State University. Stout, T.B. Year unknown. Matched Pair Safety Analysis of Four-Lane to Three-Lane Roadway Conversions In Iowa. Unpublished paper: Iowa State University. Location Various Iowa cities ADT 2,000 – 17,400 Safety Analysis MethodBefore-and-after study using yoked comparison pairs and a comparison to the cities in which the sites were located. Reported Safety EffectsThe three sets of analyses examined before-and-after changes at largely the same group of converted sites, with some additional locations added with the passage of time. The studies reported reductions in crash frequency that ranged from 21 to 38 percent. The studies reported somewhat similar reductions in crash rates, as well as reductions in the numbers of crashes related to left turns and stopped traffic. Comments The studies reported a greater difference in crash reduction between the study segments and the yoked segments than was found between the study segments and the citywide data, which the author(s) attributed to greater variation in the changes in crashes in the yoked segments. The implied degree of effectiveness for the yoked comparison was larger than for the citywide comparisons, and according to the author, might be an artifact of the selection of the yoked segments. The methodology did not account for possible regression-to-mean effects, and no tests of statistical significance were provided. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 417 57 Reference Clark, D.E. 2001. Road Diets: Athens-Clarke County’s Experience in Converting Four-lane Roadways into Three-lane Roadways. Washington DC. Proceedings of the Institute of Transportation Engineers Annual Meeting. Location One treatment site in Athens-Clarke County, GA ADT 18 – 20K Safety Analysis Method Simple before-and-after Reported Safety EffectsDuring the first 6 months after the change in lane configuration there were 40 reported crashes along the treated corridor compared with 85 crashes during the same 6 month period for the previous year. That corresponds to a 52.9% reduction. Crashes per million vehicles declined 51.1%, from 19.74 to 9.65. Comments The results of this study support other studies that show safety benefits associated with Road Diet implementation, but the relatively short post-intervention period and the lack of robust safety analysis methodology limit the utility of these findings. Reference City of Orlando. 2002. Edgewater Drive Before & After Re-Striping Results. City of Orlando - Transportation Planning Bureau. Location One treatment site in Orlando, FL ADT 18 – 20K Safety Analysis Method Simple before-and-after Reported Safety Effects During the first 4 months after the change in lane configuration the annualized crash rate per MVM declined 34%, from 12.6 (for 3 years preceding implementation) to 8.4. The injury rate per MVM declined 68%, from 3.6 to 1.2 (for the same time periods). Comments The results of this study support other studies that show safety benefits associated with Road Diet implementation, but the relatively short post-intervention period and the lack of robust safety analysis methodology limit the utility of these findings. Reference Preston, H. 1999. Access Management – A Synthesis of Research. Report MN/RC – REV 1999-21. Minnesota Department of Transportation. Location Minnesota ADT N/A Safety Analysis MethodThis was not a before-and-after study. The author presents a simple cross-sectional comparison using 1991- 1993 statewide crash data. Reported Safety EffectsThe crash rate per Million VMT for urban four-lane undivided roads was 6.75 versus a crash rate of 4.96 for three-lane roads. This comparison suggests that three-lane roads have a crash rate that is 27% lower than the rate for four-lane undivided roadways. Comments The number of miles of three-lane roads was small – 14 miles, versus 299 miles of four-lane undivided roads. The simple cross-sectional comparison does not take into account many confounding factors such as speed limits, pedestrian activity, land use, intersection spacing, driveway access, etc. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 418 582016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 419 59 Appendix B – Feasibility Determination Factors, Characteristics, and Sample Evaluative Questions Factor Characteristics Sample Evaluative Questions Roadway Function and Environment • Actual, Expected, and Desired Primary Function (Access, Mobility, or a Combination of the Two) • Community Objectives or Goals for the Roadway • Available Right-of-Way • Current and Expected Adjacent Land Use • Jurisdictional Plan or Policy for Conversions • Jurisdictional Context Sensitive or Complete Street Policy • What is the primary current, expected, and desired function of the roadway? • Is the roadway primarily a collector or minor arterial roadway? • Does the current roadway primarily operate as a “de facto” three-lane cross section? • Is the goal for the roadway improvement increased safety with somewhat lower mobility? • Is the right-of-way limited? • Will the adjacent land use remain relatively stable throughout the design period? • Will the proposed cross section match the desired function of the roadway? • Will the answers to the above questions remain the same throughout the design period of the project? • Does the jurisdiction have a plan or policy related to these types of conversions? • Does the jurisdiction have a context sensitive or Complete Streets policy that may apply? Crash Types and Patterns• Type of Crashes • Location of Crashes • Number and Location of Pedestrians and Bicyclists • Parallel Parking Needs • Can the crashes that are occurring be reduced with a conversion? • Will a reduction in speed and speed variability increase safety? • Are there safety concerns related to parallel parking maneuvers? • Do pedestrians and bicyclists have safety concerns? Pedestrian and Bike Activity • Number and Location of Pedestrians • Number and Location of Bicyclist Use • Characteristics of Pedestrians and Bicyclists (e.g., Age) • Bicycle and Pedestrian Friendliness of Roadway • Cross-section Width • Parallel Parking Need • Bus Stop Locations • What is the pedestrian and bicyclist friendliness of the roadway? • Do pedestrians and bicyclists have safety concerns? • Will the addition of a TWLTL assist pedestrians and bicyclists? • How will pedestrians and bicyclists interact with parallel parking? • Can a bike lane be added after the conversion? 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 420 60 Factor Characteristics Sample Evaluative Questions Overall Traffic Volume and Level of Service • Total Daily Volume • Peak-Hour Volume (Morning/Noon/Evening) • Directional Split • Intersection and Arterial Level of Service • Side Street and Driveway Vehicle Delay • Volume of Frequent-Stop or Slow-Moving Vehicles • Vehicle Classification • Signal Timing or Phasing • Arterial Travel Speeds and Vehicle Delays • Existence of Turn Lanes • What is an acceptable increase in minor street or signal- related delay due to the conversion? • Is a decrease in arterial travel speed of 5 mph or less acceptable? • What is an acceptable reduction in intersection level of service? • What level of daily traffic volume and peak hour exists or is expected in the design year? • Does the signal timing or phasing need to be changed? • Does the current roadway primarily operate as a “de facto” three-lane cross section? • What is the potential impact during off-peak hours? Turning Volumes and Patterns • Number and Location of Turn Volumes and Access Points • Peak Time Period of Turn Volumes • Existence of Left-Turn and Right-Turn Lanes • Design of Access Points and Intersections • Turn Volume of Frequent-Stop or Slow- Moving Vehicles • Minor Street and Access Point Vehicle Delay • Signal Timing or Phasing • Does the signal timing or phasing need to be changed or optimized? • How important is it that right-turning vehicles quickly enter or exit the roadway? • Do the access point and intersections need to be redesigned (e.g., radii, approach slopes, location)? • Are right-turn lanes needed at particular locations? • Does the proposed marking allow the design vehicle (e.g., tractor-trailer) to turn properly? • What is an acceptable increase in minor street vehicle delay and left-turning vehicle delay? • Does the current roadway primarily operate as a “de facto” three-lane cross section? Frequent-Stop and/or Slow-Moving Vehicles • Volume, Location, and Time of Frequent-Stop and/or Slow-Moving Vehicles • Type, Design (Length, Width, Turning Radius, etc.) and Speed of Vehicles • Arterial Travel Speeds and Vehicle Delays • Level of Enforcement for Proper TWLTL Use (i.e., No Passing Allowed) • What is the acceptable delay with respect to frequent- stop and/or slow-moving vehicles? • Can these vehicles turn properly at the access points and intersections? • Can passing prohibitions be feasibly enforced? • Are there locations for pull-outs for these vehicles? • Can some or all of the stop locations for the frequent- stop vehicles be combined? • What are the potential peak and off-peak impacts? 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 421 61 Factor Characteristics Sample Evaluative Questions Weaving, Speed, and Queues • Signal Timing or Phasing • Number of Existing Lane Changes • Turn Volume and Location • Arterial Travel Speeds and Vehicle Delays • Level of Enforcement for Proper TWLTL Use (i.e., No Passing Allowed) • Number and Location of Turn Volumes and Access Points • Peak Time Period of Turn Volumes • Existence of Left-Turn and Right-Turn Lanes • Design of Access Points and Intersections • Turn Volume of Frequent-Stop or Slow- Moving Vehicles • Minor Street and Access Point Vehicle Delay • Queue Length • Number of Speeders • Does the signal timing or phasing need to be changed or optimized? • How important is it that right-turning vehicles quickly enter or exit the roadway? • Do the access point and intersections need to be redesigned (e.g., radii, approach slopes, location)? • Are right-turn lanes needed at particular locations? • What is an acceptable increase in minor street and left- turning vehicle delay? • Is a decrease in arterial travel speed of 5 miles per hour or less acceptable? • What is an acceptable change in queues? • Are there safety concerns related to weaving? • Can no passing be enforced? • Can drivers be educated about proper use of TWLTL? • Is a reduction in speeders and speed variability preferred? • Can all the old markings be completely removed? • Does the current roadway primarily operate as a “de facto” three-lane cross section? Right-of-Way Availability, Cost, and Acquisition Impacts • Available Right-of-Way • Cost of Right-of-Way • Existence of Left-Turn and Right-Turn Lanes • Design of Access Points and Intersections • Number of Properties Needed and Environmental Impacts (e.g., Tree Removal) • Cross Section Width • Parallel Parking Needs • Is the right-of-way limited? • Will the cost of right-of-way acquisition be significant? • Do the access point and intersections need to be redesigned (e.g., radii, approach slopes, location)? • Are right-turn lanes needed at particular locations? • What is necessary in the cross section (e.g., bike lane, parallel parking, etc.)? General Characteristics Parallel Roadways • Roadway Network Layout • Volume and Characteristics of Through Vehicles Diverted • Impact of Diversion on Parallel Roadways • Is a decrease in arterial travel speed of 5 miles per hour or less acceptable? • Does the signal timing or phasing need to change or be optimized? • Will conversion divert through vehicles to parallel roadways? • Is it possible to avoid or reroute the diverted traffic? • What is the impact on the parallel roadway environment? 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 422 62 Factor Characteristics Sample Evaluative Questions Offset Minor Street Intersections • Volume and Time of Left Turns • Queue Lengths • Distance between Minor Street Approaches • Do left turns occur into both minor street and access point approaches at a similar time? • Are the left-turn volumes significant? • Will the left-turn volumes produce queues in the through lanes of a three-lane roadway? Parallel Parking • Parallel Parking Needs • Number of Parking Maneuvers • Operational and Safety Impacts of Parallel Parking • Design of Existing or Proposed Parallel Parking • Does parallel parking exist? • How many parking maneuvers occur during peak travel times? • What are the safety and delay concerns related to parallel parking maneuvers? • Is it possible to design these spaces for easy entry or exit (i.e., to minimize delay)? • Will it be necessary to reduce the number of parking spaces? • Does parallel parking reduce the ability of vehicles to turn in and out of minor streets and access points? Corner Radii • Design of Access Points and Intersections • Number and Location of Turn Volumes and Access Points • Peak Time Period of Turn Volumes • Existence of Left-Turn and Right-Turn Lanes • Turn Volume of Frequent-Stop or Slow- Moving Vehicles • Minor Street and Access Point Vehicle Delay • How important is it that right-turning vehicles quickly enter or exit the roadway? • Do the access points and intersections need to be redesigned (e.g., radii, approach slopes, location)? • Are right-turn lanes needed at particular locations? • Does the proposed marking allow the design vehicle (e.g., tractor-trailer) to turn properly? • Do parallel parking spaces need to be removed to allow proper turning? At-Grade Railroad Crossing • Volume, Location, and Time of Train Crossing • Length of Crossing Train • Delay Impacts of Train Crossing • Queue Impacts of Train Crossing • Total Daily Vehicle Volume • Peak-Hour Vehicle Volume (Morning/Noon/ Evening) • Directional Split of Vehicles • Do trains cross during peak travel periods? • What is the typical delay from a train crossing? • Is double the current queue length (with four-lane undivided cross section) at a railroad at-grade crossing acceptable? • Is there a nearby parallel at-grade intersection where impacts may need to be mitigated? Adapted from Knapp, Welch, and Witmer, 1999. 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 423 63 1. FHWA, “Proven Safety Countermeasures” web page. Available at: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/index.htm 2. FHWA “Proven Safety Countermeasures, ‘Road Diet’ (Roadway Reconfiguration),” FHWA-SA-12-013 (Washington, DC: 2012). Available at: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/fhwa_sa_12_013.htm 3. Stamatiadis, N et al. “Guidelines for Road Diet Conversions.” 2011. Available at: http://nacto.org/docs/usdg/guidelines_for_road_diet_conversion_stamatiadis.pdf 4. Rosales, J., Road Diet Handbook: Setting Trends for Livable Streets, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington, DC, 2006. 5. Rosales, 2006. 6. Harwood, D.W. NCHRP 282: Multilane Design Alternatives for Improving Suburban Highways, (Transportation Research Board: Washington, DC, March 1986). 7. Knapp, K., T. Welch, J. Witmer. Converting Four-Lane Undivided Roadways to a Three-Lane Cross Section: Factors to Consider. 8. Nemeth, Z.A., “Two-Way Left-Turn Lanes: State-of-the-Art Overview and Implementation Guide.” Transportation Research Record 681 (1978): 62-69. 9. Pawlovich, M., W. Li, A. Carriquiry, and T. Welch, Iowa’s Experience with “Road Diet” Measures: Impacts on Crash Frequencies and Crash Rates Assessed Following a Bayesian Approach, 2005. 10. Harkey, D., R. Srinivasan, J. Baek, NCHRP 617: Accident Modification Factors for Traffic Engineering and ITS Improvements. (Transportation Research Board: Washington, DC, 2008). Available at: http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_617.pdf 11. FHWA “Proven Safety Countermeasures, ‘Road Diet’ (Roadway Reconfiguration),” FHWA-SA-12-013 (Washington, DC: 2012). Available at: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/fhwa_sa_12_013.htm 12. FHWA “Evaluation of Lane Reduction ‘Road Diet’ Measures on Crashes.” FHWA Report No. FHWA-HRT-10-053”. (Washington, D.C: 2010) 13. Stout, Thomas B., Before and After Study of Some Impacts of 4-Lane to 3-Lane Roadway Conversions. March 2005. 14. FHWA, Pedestrian Facilities Users Guide – Providing Safety and Mobility. FHWA-RD-01-102 (Washington, DC: 2001). Available at http://katana.hsrc.unc.edu/cms/downloads/PedFacility_UserGuide2002.pdf 15. FHWA, Safety Effects of Marked vs. Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations: Executive Summary and Recommended Guidelines, FHWA-RD-01-075 (Washington, DC: 2001). 16. Garder P, “Pedestrian safety at traffic signals: a study carried out with the help of a traffic conflicts technique.” Accident Analysis and Prevention 21: 435–444. 17. FHWA Office of Planning, Environment, and Realty. “Livability Initiative” web page. Available at: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/livability/ 18. FHWA Proven Safety Countermeasures, Median and Pedestrian Crossing Islands in Urban and Suburban Areas, Washington, DC, 2012. 19. Welch, T. The Conversion of Four Lane Undivided Urban Roadways to Three Lane Facilities. 1999. 20. Knapp, K., K. Giese, Guidelines for the Conversion of Urban Four-Lane Undivided Roadways to Three-Lane Two-Way Left-Turn Lane Facilities, 2001. 21. FHWA, “Context Sensitive Solutions” web page. Available at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/context/what.cfm 22. FHWA, “Principles of Context Sensitive Design” web page. Available at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/context/qualities.cfm 23. Knapp, Welch, and Witmer, 1999. 24. Knapp, Welch, and Witmer, 1999. 25. Knapp and Giese, 2001, p. 66. 26. Gates, T., et al., The Safety and Operational Effects of "Road Diet" Conversions in Minnesota, 2007, pp. 65-66. 27. City of Orlando, Edgewater Drive Before & After Re-Striping Results, 2002, p. 2. 28. Gates et al., 2007, pp. 69. 29. Gates et al., 2007, pp. 67. 30. Chu, X. and M. Baltes, “Measuring Pedestrian Quality of Service of Midblock Street Crossings,” Paper No. 03-5045, Transportation Research Record 1828 (2004): 89-97. 31. McLeod, D.S. “Multimodal Arterial Level of Service,” Transportation Research Circular E-C018 (2000): 221-233. 32. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Highway Capacity Manual (Washington, D.C.: 2010), p. 16-7. 33. Knapp and Giese, 2001, p. 39. 34. Knapp and Giese, 2001, p. 51. 35. Stamatiadis et al., 2011, p. 29. 36. Gates, T., D. Noyce, V. Talada, L. Hill, Safety and Operational Characteristics of Two-Way Left-Turn Lanes, 2006, p. 25. 37. Knapp, K., K. Giese, and W. Lee, Urban Four-Lane Undivided to Three-Lane Roadway Conversion Guidelines, 2003. 38. Knapp, Welch, and Witmer, 1999. 39. Knapp, Welch, and Witmer, 1999. 40. Knapp, Giese, and Lee, 2003. 41. The League of American Bicyclists, “Road Diets Now Proven Safety Measure; Q&A with FHWA Associate Administrator Furst,” News from the League, February 6, 2012. Available at: http://www.bikeleague.org/content/road-diets-now-proven-safety-measure-qa-fhwa-associate-administrator-furst 42. Rosales, 2006. 43. New York State Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations, "Complete Streets Fact Sheet," New York, 2012. 44. New York State Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations, "Complete Streets Fact Sheet 2.0," New York, 2014. 45. Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission. Regional Road Diet Analysis Feasibility Assessment. 2008. 46. Tan, C., “Going on a Road Diet,” Public Roads, Sept/Oct 2011. References 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 424 64 47. In-person meeting with Tracie Leix, P.E., Safety Programs Unit Manager, Michigan Department of Transportation. March 20, 2013. 48. Interview with Christopher Zull, Traffic Safety Manager, and Carissa McQuiston, Traffic Engineer, City of Grand Rapids, Michigan, on March 20, 2013. 49. Interview with Andrew Kilpatrick, Transportation Engineer, City of Lansing, Michigan, March 22, 2013. 50. Research team interview with Derek Bradshaw and Jason Nordberg, Genesee County Metropolitan Planning Commission, Michigan. March 21, 2013. 51. FHWA, Flexibility in Highway Design. (Washington, DC: 2012) 52. AASHTO, A Guide for Achieving Flexibility in Highway Design, 1st Edition, 2004. 53. FHWA, “Memorandum: Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Design Flexibility,” August 20, 2013. Available at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/guidance/design_guidance/design_flexibility.cfm 54. New Jersey Department of Transportation and Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, Smart Transportation Guidebook: Planning and Designing Highways and Streets that Support Sustainable and Livable Communities, 2008. Available at: http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/community/mobility/pdf/smarttransportationguidebook2008.pdf 55. AASHTO, A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 6th Edition, 2011. 56. Gattis, J.L. et al., NCHRP Report 659: Guide for the Geometric Design of Driveways, (Transportation Research Board: Washington, DC, 2012). 57. FHWA, User’s Guide to Positive Guidance, 3rd Edition, (Washington, DC: 1990). 58. Campbell, J., et al, NCHRP Report 600: Human Factors Guidelines for Road Systems, Second Edition, (Transportation Research Board: Washington, DC, 2012). 59. Morena, D., W.S. Wainwright, and F. Ranck, “Older Drivers at a Crossroads,” Public Roads, FHWA-HRT-2007-002, Vol. 70, No. 4, January/February 2007. 60. AASHTO, Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, 4th Edition, 2012. 61. FHWA, “Memorandum: Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Design Flexibility,” August 20, 2013. Available at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/guidance/design_guidance/design_flexibility.cfm 62. FHWA, Speed Concepts: Informational Guide, FHWA-SA-10-001 (Washington, D.C.: 2009). 63. FHWA, “Access Management in the Vicinity of Intersections,” Washington, DC. 2010. Available at: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/resources/fhwasa10002/ 64. AASHTO, Guide for High-Occupancy (HOV) Facilities, 2004. 65. Texas Department of Transportation, Roadway Design Manual, Section 2.6, 2013. Available at http://onlinemanuals.txdot.gov/txdotmanuals/rdw/cross_sectional_elements.htm#BGBGIBAE 66. AASHTO, Highway Drainage Guidelines, 4th Edition, 2007. 67. AASHTO, Model Drainage Manual, 3rd Edition, 2005. 68. AASHTO, Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities, 1st Edition, 2004. 69. The most recent PROWAG is in draft form as of July 2014. 70. AASHTO, Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, 4th Edition, 2012. 71. AASTHO, A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 2011. 72. Texas Transportation Institute, TCRP Report 19: Guidelines for the Location and Design of Bus Stops, (Transportation Research Board of the National Academies: Washington, D.C., 1996). 73. Gattis, et al., 2012. 74. Harwood, D. W., NCHRP Report 282: Multilane Design Alternatives for Improving Suburban Highways (Transportation Research Board: Washington, DC, 1986). 75. Harwood, D.W., NCHRP Report 330: Effective Utilization of Street Width on Urban Arterials, (Transportation Research Board: Washington, DC, 1990). 76. Fitzpatrick, K. et al., TCRP Report 112/NCHRP Report 562: Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings, (Transportation Research Board: Washington, DC, 2006). 77. AASHTO, Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities, 1st Edition, 2004. 78. Bartlett, J., B. Graves, and T. Redmon, “Proven Countermeasures for Pedestrian Safety,” Public Roads, FHWA-HRT-12-003, Vol. 75, No. 5, March/April 2012. 79. Gattis et al., 2012. 80. FHWA, Access Management in the Vicinity of Intersections – Technical Summary, FHWA-SA-10-002 (Washington, DC: 2002). 81. City of Seattle, WA 82. Institute of Transportation Engineers, “Before-and-After Study,” Technical Brief, (Washington DC. Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2009. 83. Hauer, E., D.W. Harwood, F.M. Council, and M.S. Griffith, Estimating Safety by the Empirical Bayes Method: A Tutorial, 2002. Available at: http://pubsindex.trb.org/document/view/default.asp?lbid=726704 84. AASHTO, Highway Safety Manual, 1st Edition, 2010 85. Hauer, E., Observational Before – After Studies in Road Safety. (Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK: 1997). 86. AASHTO, An Introduction to the Highway Safety Manual, 2010. 87. AASHTO, Highway Safety Manual, 1st Edition, 2010 88. FH WA, 1989 89. Porter, R.J., E.T. Donnell, and J.M. Mason, “Geometric Design, Speed, and Safety,” Transportation Research Record 2309 (2012): 39-47. 90. Rosales, 2006. 91. Harwood, 1986. 92. FHWA, "Context Sensitive Solutions" web page. Available at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/context/what.cfm 93. FHWA, "Proven Safety Countermeasures" web page. Available at: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/index.htm 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 425 For More Information: For more information, visit http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ FHWA, Office of Safety Rebecca Crowe rebecca.crowe@dot.gov 804-775-3381 FHWA-SA-14-028 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 426 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 427 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 428 RESOLUTION NO. __________ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA COMMITTING TO PROVIDING MATCHING FUNDSIN THE AMOUNT OF $220,000 FROM THE BIKE LANES ON BROADWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY PROJECT(STM384)TO THE ATP GRANT “CLASS 2 BIKE LANES ON BROADWAY PROJECT NO. 11-CHULA VISTA-1”; ACCEPTING THE TERMS OF THE GRANT AGREEMENT IF AWARDED;AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS OR HIS DESIGNEE TO ACCEPT THE ATP CYCLE 3 GRANT FUNDING AND EXECUTE ALL GRANT DOCUMENTS AND REQUESTS FOR PAYMENTS NECESSARY TO SECURE GRANT FUNDS WHEREAS, the City applied for $1,246,000 in funding fromthe statewide 2016 Active Transportation Program (ATP)grant program and submitted an electronic copy of the application and additional questionnaire to SANDAG for the Regional 2016 ATP competition for the Class 2 Bike Lanes on Broadway in Chula Vista, CA, ATP Project no. 11-Chula Vista-1; and WHEREAS, the Regional ATP submittal requires thatthe City Councilpass certain resolutions, consistent with SANDAG Board Policy No. 035, andsubmitsuchprior to November 25, 2016; and WHEREAS, on February 16, 2016 by Resolution 2016-023,the City Council adopted the Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study, which recommended installation ofBike Lanes on Broadway from C Street to Main Streetand authorized the implementation of the study recommendations as funding allows; and WHEREAS, Transnet funds in the amount of $250,000 were appropriated in the Fiscal Year 2016/2017Capital Improvement Program under the Bike Lane on Broadway Feasibility Study, (STM384)for the initial implementation toconstruct Bike Lanes on Broadway from C Street to G Street. It is proposed that $220,000 of these funds be used as the required match for this grant; and WHEREAS, the STM384 project is consistent with the ATP goals such as increasing walking and biking in the community convertingthe existing bike route facility to bike lanes on Broadway will reduce bicyclists riding on the sidewalk, thereby reducing collisions; and NOW, THEREFORE, BEIT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, that itcommits to provide matching funds in the amount of $220,000from the Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Studyproject(STM384)to the ATP grant “Class 2 Bike Lanes on Broadway Project no.“11-Chula Vista-1”;accepts the terms of the grant agreement if awarded; and authorizesthe Director of Public Works or his designee to accept the ATP Cycle 3 grant funding and all grant documents and requests for payments necessary to secure grant funds. Presented by Approved as to form by 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 429 Richard A. Hopkins Glen R. Googins Director of Public Works City Attorney 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 430 City of Chula Vista Staff Report File#:16-0438, Item#: 9. REPORTGIVINGNOTICEOFINTENTTOAMENDTHECONFLICTOFINTERESTCODEOFTHE CITYOFCHULAVISTAANDDIRECTINGTHECITYCLERKANDCITYATTORNEYTORETURN TO COUNCIL TO PRESENT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS WITHIN 90 DAYS RECOMMENDED ACTION CouncilacceptthereportanddirecttheCityClerkandCityAttorneytopresentproposed amendments to the conflict of interest code within 90 days. SUMMARY ThePoliticalReformActrequireseverylocalagencytoreviewitsConflictofInterestCodeto determinewhetheramendmentsareneeded.TheCityClerkandCityAttorneyhavereviewedthe City'sconflictofinterestcodeanditsappendix,andhavedeterminedthatamendmentsare necessary.StaffanticipatesreturningtoCouncilwithin90daystopresenttheproposed amendments. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Environmental Notice Theactivityisnota“Project”asdefinedunderSection15378oftheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQuality ActStateGuidelines;therefore,pursuanttoStateGuidelinesSection15060(c)(3)noenvironmental review is required. Environmental Determination TheDirectorofDevelopmentServiceshasreviewedtheproposedactivityforcompliancewiththe CaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct(CEQA)andhasdeterminedthatthisactivityisnota“Project” asdefinedunderSection15378oftheStateCEQAGuidelinesbecauseitwillnotresultinaphysical changetotheenvironment;therefore,pursuanttoSection15060(c)(3)oftheStateCEQAGuidelines, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is required. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Not applicable. DISCUSSION OnMarch21,2000,theCounciladoptedOrdinanceNo.2807,adoptingbyreferencethe standardizedconflictofinterestcodecontainedinTitle2oftheCaliforniaCodeofRegulations, Section18730,andanyamendmentstheretothatareadoptedbytheFairPoliticalPractices Commission.TheordinancerequiresthattheCouncilsetforthbyresolutionanappendixthatliststhe officialsanddesignatedemployeeswhoarerequiredtofilestatementsofeconomicinterestsandthe disclosure categories under which each such official and designated employee shall file. ThePoliticalReformActrequiresthattheCityCouncilbenotifiedbyOctober1ofeven-numbered City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 431 File#:16-0438, Item#: 9. ThePoliticalReformActrequiresthattheCityCouncilbenotifiedbyOctober1ofeven-numbered yearswhetheramendmentstotheconflictofinterestcodeareneeded.Then,within90days, amendments to the code are submitted to the City Council for consideration. TheCityClerkandCityAttorneyhavereviewedtheCity'sconflictofinterestcodeanditsappendix, andhavedeterminedthatamendmentsarenecessary.Theamendmentsareexpectedtoinclude changestothelistofdesignatedfilerstoaccountforrecentlyaddedandremovedpositionsfromthe City’sclassificationplan.Filingcategoriesforcurrentfilersarebeingreviewed,somodificationto theirrequireddisclosuresmayalsoberecommended.StaffwillreturntoCouncilwithin90daysto present proposed amendments. DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT Staffhasreviewedthedecisioncontemplatedbythisactionandhasdeterminedthatitisnotsite- specificandconsequently,the500-footrulefoundinCaliforniaCodeofRegulationsTitle2, section18702.2(a)(11),isnotapplicabletothisdecisionforpurposesofdetermininga disqualifyingrealproperty-relatedfinancialconflictofinterestunderthePoliticalReformAct(Cal. Gov't Code § 87100, et seq.). Staffisnotindependentlyaware,andhasnotbeeninformedbyanyCityCouncilmember,ofany other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision maker conflict of interest in this matter. LINK TO STRATEGIC GOALS TheCity’sStrategicPlanhasfivemajorgoals:OperationalExcellence,EconomicVitality,Healthy Community,StrongandSecureNeighborhoodsandaConnectedCommunity.Adoptionofthisitem supportstheCity’sgoalofprovidingresponsiblepublicserviceandfosteringpublictrustthroughan open and ethical government. CURRENT YEAR FISCAL IMPACT Acceptance of the report will have no impact on the general fund. ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT There is no ongoing fiscal impact. ATTACHMENTS None Staff Contact: Kerry Bigelow City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 432 City of Chula Vista Staff Report File#:16-0440, Item#: 10. RESOLUTIONOFTHECITYCOUNCILOFTHECITYOFCHULAVISTAACCEPTING$81,378 FROMTHECOUNTYOFSANDIEGOANDAPPROPRIATINGSAIDFUNDSTOTHEPOLICE GRANT FUND FOR REALIGNMENT RESPONSE EFFORTS (4/5 VOTE REQUIRED) RECOMMENDED ACTION Council adopt the resolution. SUMMARY In2011,GovernorEdmundG.BrownJr.signedAssemblyBill(AB)109andAB117,historic legislationtoenableCaliforniatoclosetherevolvingdooroflow-levelinmatescyclinginandoutof stateprisons.Thislegislationprovidedfundingtocountiestodevelopandimplementatargeted, proactive,intelligence-basedapproachtocontrolandcounteracttherisksassociatedwithrealigned offendersreleasedinSanDiegoCounty.ThisisthesecondtimetheCityhasbeenawardedfundsto continue to support the efforts delineated within Assembly Bill (AB) 109. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Environmental Notice Theactivityisnota“Project”asdefinedunderSection15378oftheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQuality ActStateGuidelines;therefore,pursuanttoStateGuidelinesSection15060(c)(3)noenvironmental review is required. Environmental Determination The Director of Development Services has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines because it will not result in a physical change in the environment; therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Not Applicable. DISCUSSION In2011,GovernorEdmundG.BrownJr.signedAssemblyBill(AB)109andAB117,historic legislationtoenableCaliforniatoclosetherevolvingdooroflow-levelinmatescyclinginandoutof stateprisons.ItisthecornerstoneofCalifornia’ssolutiontotheU.S.SupremeCourtordertoreduce the number of inmates in the state’s 33 prisons to 137.5 percent of original design capacity. UndertheAssemblyBill(AB)109andAB117newly-convictedlow-leveloffenderswithoutcurrentor priorseriousorviolentoffensesstayincountyjailtoservetheirsentences.Thishasreducedthe annualstateprisonadmissionstolessthan35,000ayear.PriortoRealignment,therewere City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 433 File#:16-0440, Item#: 10. annualstateprisonadmissionstolessthan35,000ayear.PriortoRealignment,therewere approximately55,000to65,000newadmissionsfromcountycourtstostateprison.Overall,the diversionoflow-leveloffendersandparoleviolatorstocountyjailsinsteadofstateprisonshas resulted in a population decrease of about 28,000 (-17%). Theintentoftherealignmentresponseeffortsistoencouragecountiestodevelopandimplement evidence-basedpracticesandalternativestoincarcerationtolimitfuturecrimesandreduce victimization. TheSanDiegoSheriffDepartmenthasbeendesignatedasthefiscalagentofrealignmentresponse effortsfundsfortheSanDiegoCountyregion.AMemorandumofAgreementbetweentheCountyof SanDiegoandparticipatingcitiesinthecountyhasbeencreatedtooutlinethedisbursementof realignmentfunds.Again,theCityofChulaVistahasbeenawardedfundingtosupportoperations startingJuly1,2016andendingbyDecember31,2017.FundingfromAssemblyBill(AB)109was originallyawardedtoChulaVistaonDecember2013.ThisisthesecondawardgrantedtotheCity.If CityCouncilaccepts,theawardis$81,378andwouldbeusedtofundovertimeoperationsto conduct compliance checks on San Diego County Probationers. DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT Staffhasreviewedthedecisioncontemplatedbythisactionandhasdeterminedthatitisnotsite specificandconsequentlythe500-footrulefoundinCaliforniaCodeofRegulationssection18704.2 (a)(1)isnotapplicabletothisdecision.Staffisnotindependentlyaware,norhasstaffbeeninformed byanyCityCouncilmember,ofanyotherfactthatmayconstituteabasisforadecisionmakerconflict of interest in this matter. LINK TO STRATEGIC GOALS TheCity’sStrategicPlanhasfivemajorgoals:OperationalExcellence,EconomicVitality,Healthy Community,StrongandSecureNeighborhoodsandaConnectedCommunity.Fundsreceivedfor realignmentresponseeffortssupportthegoalofStrongandSecureNeighborhoodsbyproviding additional law enforcement presence in the community. CURRENT YEAR FISCAL IMPACT Approvalofthisresolutionwillresultinaone-timeappropriationof$81,378topersonnelservicesof thePoliceGrantFund.ThefundingfromtheCountyofSanDiegowillcompletelyoffsetthesecosts, resulting in no net fiscal impact to the General Fund. ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT There is no ongoing fiscal impact. Staff Contact: Joseph Walker, Police Department City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 434 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING $81,378 FROM THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO AND APPROPRIATING SAID FUNDS TO THE POLICE GRANT FUND FOR REALIGNMENT RESPONSE EFFORTS WHEREAS, in 2011,Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. signed Assembly Bill (AB) 109 and AB 117 legislation,whichenable California to close the revolving door of low- level inmates cycling in and out of state prisons;and WHEREAS, this legislation implemented the 2011 Public Safety Realignment, which provides funding to counties to develop and implement evidence-based practices and alternatives to incarceration to limit future crimes and reduce victimization; and WHEREAS, the County ofSan Diego Sheriff’s Department has been designated as the fiscal agent of the Regional Realignment Response (R3) fundsandhas allocated $81,378to the City of Chula Vista for overtime operations to conduct regional compliance checks on probationerswithin the county; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista that it accepts$81,378from the County of San Diego and appropriatessaid funds to the Police Grant Fundfor Realignment Response Efforts. Presented by:Approved as to form by: ____________________________________________ David Bejarano Glen R. Googins Police Chief City Attorney 2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 435 City of Chula Vista Staff Report File#:16-0445, Item#: 11. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9 (d)(1) Name of case:Katherine Wenrich v. City of Chula Vista, et al., San Diego Superior Court, Case No. 37-2014-37007-CU-PA-CTL. City of Chula Vista Printed on 9/15/2016Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™2016-09-20 Agenda Packet Page 436